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

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3512 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3512

    To reauthorize the Historically Black Colleges and Universities 
                     Historic Preservation Program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            December 7, 2016

  Mr. Graham introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To reauthorize the Historically Black Colleges and Universities 
                     Historic Preservation Program.

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

SECTION 1. HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES HISTORIC 
              PRESERVATION PROGRAM REAUTHORIZED.

    Section 507(d)(2) of division I of the Omnibus Parks and Public 
Lands Management Act of 1996 (54 U.S.C. 302101 note; Public Law 104-
333) is amended by striking the period at the end and inserting ``and 
each of fiscal years 2017 through 2023.''.
                                 <all>
```
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

This certificationis provided pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 andaccompanies the quarterly report on Form 10-Q (the “Form 10-Q”) forthe quarter ended September 30, 2008 of Valence Technology, Inc. (the“Issuer”).

 

I, Robert L. Kanode, thePrincipal Financial Officer of the Issuer, certify that to the best of myknowledge:

 

(i)                                                                the Form 10-Q fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

 

(ii)                                                               the information contained in the Form 10-Qfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Issuer.

 
| Dated:  November 10, 2008 |                                                          |
|--------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------|
|                           | /s/ Robert L.  Kanode                                         |
|                           | Robert L. Kanode                                              |
|                           | President and Chief Executive Officer                         |
|                           | (Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer) |

 

----
In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

______________________________

No. 06-09-00061-CV

______________________________

IN RE: JEFFREY DALE MAYNARD

 

Original Mandamus Proceeding

 

 

Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Moseley
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In his petition for mandamus relief, Jeffrey Dale Maynard has petitioned this Court to order

the Honorable Robert Newsom, judge of the 8th Judicial District Court ofHopkins County, to "cease

and desist the removal, and/or ordered removal, of funds from his inmate trust fund account for the

purpose of paying fines and court costs, and, to immediately return all such funds removed and/or

ordered removed to date." We deny the requested relief. 

Maynard has alleged that funds have been removed from his inmate trust account without

his having been served or provided with any garnishment order or other order authorizing such

action. A trial court may order the attachment of an inmate's trust fund monies as payment for that

inmate's court costs, fines, fees, restitution, and other obligations. TEX.GOV'T CODE ANN.§ 501.014

(Vernon 2004). However, "Texas courts have long recognized that prisoners have a property interest

in their inmate trust accounts." Harrell v. State, No. 07-0806, 2009 Tex. LEXIS 321, at *9 (Tex.

June 5, 2009); Abdullah v. State, 211 S.W.3d 938, 943 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2007, no pet.). 

Although an inmate is entitled to notice of the State's attachment of the inmate's trust funds

and a chance to appeal that taking, the "Constitution does not require pre-withdrawal notice or a

comprehensive civil garnishment proceeding." Harrell, 2009 Tex. LEXIS 321, at *15. 

Maynard has supplied us with no record of the proceedings in the trial court, but the

respondent, Judge Newsom, has provided copies of the trial court's judgment and an order to

withdraw inmate trust funds with his response. Both of these documents were entered September 8,
We grant the extraordinary relief of mandamus only when the trial court has clearly abused 1

its discretion and the relator lacks an adequate appellate remedy. In re Team Rocket, L.P., 256

S.W.3d 257 (Tex. 2008).

3

2008, and each bears Maynard's signature. These documents reveal that Maynard was shown a copy

of and made fully aware of the order for withdrawal of inmate trust funds. 

Maynard having received all the notice to which he was entitled for the State's attachment

of funds in his trust fund account, he has not established any right to mandamus relief. A challenge 1

to an order withholding or attaching an inmate's trust funds should be by direct appeal, not by a

petition for writ of mandamus. Id. at *14. 

We deny Maynard's request for mandamus relief. 

Bailey C. Moseley

Justice

Date Submitted: July 8, 2009

Date Decided: July 9, 2009
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Clifton Alvin CLEVELAND, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 12-7544.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Dec. 20, 2012.

Decided: Dec. 27, 2012.

James Wyda, Federal Public Defender, Paresh S. Patel, Thomas E. Sarachan, Staff Attorneys, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellant. Rod J. Rosenstein, United States Attorney, Barbara S. Sale, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

*261Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Clifton Alvin Cleveland appeals the district court’s order granting his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 8582(c)(2) (2006). Although the district court granted Cleveland’s § 3582 motion, the court did not reduce Cleveland’s sentence to the full extent he requested. Cleveland contends that his amended Guidelines range was lower than the reduction he received because he argues that, under the Fair Sentencing Act (“FSA”), he was no longer subject to a statutory mandatory minimum five-year sentence for his 21 U.S.C. § 841 (2006) offense. However, the FSA does not apply retroactively to defendants, like Cleveland, who were sentenced before the FSA’s effective date. *United States v. Bullard,*645 F.3d 237, 248 (4th Cir.), *cert. denied,*— U.S.-, 132 S.Ct. 356, 181 L.Ed.2d 225 (2011). Accordingly, we affirm. 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.*
**UNITED STATES**SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION**WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

**FORM 10-K

ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the Fiscal Year Ended**December 31, 2003
 

 **                                                                           
Commission
Registrant; State of Incorporation
IRS Employer
File Number
Address; and Telephone Number
Identification No.      
001-01245**WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY
39-0476280 
(A Wisconsin Corporation)  
231 West Michigan Street  
P.O. Box 2949  
Milwaukee, WI 53201  
(414) 221-2345  **                                                                        

Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:    None  
Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
     Serial Preferred Stock, 3.60% Series, $100 Par Value
     Six Per Cent.  Preferred Stock, $100 Par Value

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

    Yes [X]    No [  ]

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the registrant's knowledge, in the definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.    [X]

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).

    Yes [  ]    No [X]

The aggregate market value of the common equity of Wisconsin Electric Power Company held by non-affiliates as of June 30, 2003 was zero.  All of the common stock of Wisconsin Electric Power Company is held by Wisconsin Energy Corporation.****************
### THRIVENT MUTUAL FUNDS

Supplement to Prospectus dated July 17, 2004
                                                               Regarding
                                                   Thrivent Partner High Yield Fund

Effective December 30, 2004, the name of Thrivent Partner High Yield Fund will be changed to Thrivent High Yield Fund II.

The date of this Supplement is December 7, 2004.

Please include this Supplement with your Prospectus.
Exhibit 10.39


 


February 23,
2009


 


BY HAND
DELIVERY


 


Michael
Rescoe


400
Interpace Parkway


Parsippany,
NJ 07054


 


Dear
Mike:


 


This
letter will follow up on our conversations regarding the expected transition of
the Corporate Finance function to the UK and your departure as Chief Financial
Officer of Travelport following a transition period.  Pursuant to Section 7(e) and Section 11(i) of
the November 9, 2006 Employment Agreement between you and Travelport
Limited (“the Employment Agreement”), this will confirm that your employment
with Travelport Limited and its subsidiaries will be terminated without Cause
(as defined in the Employment Agreement) under Section 7(c) of the
Employment Agreement, effective October 1, 2009, provided you remain
employed in good standing, i.e., you are
not terminated for Cause (as defined in the Employment Agreement)  and you do not
terminate your employment other than as a result of your death or Constructive
Termination (as defined in the Employment Agreement), through October 1,
2009.  As part of your separation from
service with the Company, you will receive the severance benefits set forth in Section 7(c)(iii) of
the Employment Agreement as well as certain other benefits, each as more fully
set forth in the attached Agreement and General Release and Personal Statement
of Termination Benefits.


 


Thank
you for your contributions to the Company.


 


Very
truly yours,


 


 


Jo-Anne
Kruse


Executive
Vice President, Human Resources


Travelport
Limited


 


UNDERSTOOD
AND AGREED:


 


	
  /s/
  Michael Rescoe

  	
   

  
	
  Michael
  Rescoe

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  2/23/09

  	
   

  
	
  Date
IV 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 314

Congratulating the University of Illinois Fighting Illini men’s tennis team 

for their successful season. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 9, 2003

Mr. JOHNSON of Illinois submitted the following resolution; which was referred 

to the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

RESOLUTION

Congratulating the University of Illinois Fighting Illini men’s 

tennis team for their successful season.

Whereas the University of Illinois Fighting Illini men’s tennis 

team concluded their season with a rare Triple Crown, 

including championships in the team tournament, singles 

tournament, and doubles tournament, which were held at 

the University of Georgia in Athens; 

Whereas the Fighting Illini became the first team that used 

three different players in the singles and doubles tournaments to capture the Triple Crown of college tennis; 

Whereas the Fighting Illini won the first NCAA team championship in the history of the University of Illinois’s tennis program as well as the first national team title for 

the university in any sport since 1989; 
2

•HRES 314 IH 

Whereas the Fighting Illini became the first team, other than 

the teams of the University of Southern California, Stanford University, the University of California, Los Angeles, and the University of Georgia, to win the national 

title since the NCAA adopted the current NCAA team 

championship format in 1977; 

Whereas the Fighting Illini earned the team’s first Intercollegiate Tennis Association National Indoor Championship 

in February 2003, after which the team propelled to the 

number one ranking where it remained for the entire season; 

Whereas the Fighting Illini won their seventh consecutive Big 

Ten Conference regular-season championship, as well as 

their sixth Big Ten Tournament crown in the last seven 

years; 

Whereas the Fighting Illini has become the team with the alltime most wins, and the fourth undefeated and untied 

team in the 84-year history of the University of Illinois 

men’s tennis program; 

Whereas the Fighting Illini team member, Amer Delic, won 

the first national singles title of the University of Illinois 

and team members Rajeev Ram and Brian Wilson won 

the university’s second NCAA doubles crown; and 

Whereas the 2003 Fighting Illini team was one of only two 

teams in the 64 team NCAA tournament that was comprised entirely of players from the United States: Now, 

therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives—

2 (1) congratulates and recognizes the University 

3 of Illinois Fighting Illini men’s tennis team, coach 
3

•HRES 314 IH 

1 Craig Tiley, and assistant coach Bruce Breque for 

2 the team’s historic, successful, and monumental sea3 son; and 

4 (2) directs the Clerk of the House of Represent5 atives to send, upon passage, an official copy of this 

6 Resolution to coach Craig Tiley, assistant coach 

7 Bruce Breque, and all other members of the 2003 

8 National Championship men’s tennis team.

Æ
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 21


                             WHITTAKER CORPORATION

                             A DELAWARE CORPORATION

                              ACTIVE SUBSIDIARIES
                              -------------------

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                              PLACE OF                % OWNERSHIP
NAME OF COMPANY            INCORPORATION              (# SHARES)
-------------------        -------------            ---------------
<S>                        <C>                      <C>
 
Blue Bell Lease,           California               100%    (1,000)
 Inc.
 
Metropolitan               Colorado                 100%    (  100)
 Financial Services
 Corporation
 
Park Chemical              Michigan                 100%    (1,000)
 Company
 
Whittaker                  California               100%    (1,000)
 Communications, Inc.
 
Whittaker                  England                  100%    (    2)
 Communications
 Limited
 
Whittaker Controls,        California               100%    (1,000)
 Inc.
 
Whittaker Corp.            Maine                    100%    (1,000)
 
Whittaker                  Barbados                 100%    (1,000)
 International, Inc.
 
Whittaker Ordnance,        Delaware                 100%    (    1)
 Inc.
 
Whittaker Political        California               100%    (  100)
 Action Committee,
 Inc.
 
Whittaker Porta            California               100%    (1,000)
 Bella, Inc.
 
Whittaker Services         California               100%    (1,000)
 Corporation
 
Whittaker Technical        Colorado                 100%    (1,000)
 Products, Inc.
  Division:
  Whittaker Power
  Storage Systems
</TABLE>
#### McCAFFREY et al. v. UNITED STATES.

United States District Court S. D. New York.

March 24, 1952.

Greengold & Byrne, New York City (A. Harold Frost, New York City, of counsel), for plaintiffs.

Myles J. Lane, U. S. Atty., New York City, John D. Kelly, Asst. U.S. Atty., New York City, for defendant.

CONGER, District Judge.

The plaintiffs move (1) for the production for inspection pursuant to Rule 34, F.R.C.P., 28 U.S.C.A., of written reports and statements made by the operator of the United States mail truck involved in the accident; reports and investigation statements made by the Post Office Inspectors concerning the accident; witnesses’ statements obtained by the Post Office, Inspectors’ diagrams or surveys of the scene; and all other papers and documents relating to the accident, (2) to increase the amount demanded in the complaint on behalf of the infant plaintiff from $10,000 to $25,000.

Rule 34 requires a showing of good cause by a party seeking the production of documents, etc. The decisions interpreting “good cause” run the gamut from the extremely liberal view of De Bruce v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., D.C.E.D.Pa.1947 *5136 F.R.D. 403 to the more exacting requirements of Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, *67*S.Ct. 385, 91 L.Ed. 451. It is generally thought, however, that the Hickman rule is controlling only where the “work product” of the attorney is involved. On the other hand, the De Bruce view is not generally followed by the cases. See Moore’s Federal Practice, §'34.08 on all this.

The “good cause” offered in support of the present application consists of the absence of information given in the accident report filed by the operator of the mail truck with the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles. But the plaintiffs have already examined the operator and there is no showing that they are unaware of witnesses or need the material to prepare their case otherwise. In fact the plaintiffs waited until the day of trial before they attempted to get this material by subpoena. I am of the opinion that they have failed to show “good cause.”

I have not considered defendant’s contention in opposition to this application that the sought material is confidential.

The motion to amend the complaint is granted.

Settle order.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,



AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO



SECTION 906 OF THE U.S. SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002







In connection with the Quarterly Report of Jewett-Cameron Trading Company Ltd. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended May 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned officers of the Company does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|Date:  July 12, 2010 | Signed:  /s/  "Donald M. Boone"   
|-------------------- | ----------------------------------
|                     | Donald M. Boone,
President and CEO
----

|   | 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K of World Acceptance Corporation; and |
|--------|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 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. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:  June 14, 2012 |   | /s/  Kelly M. Malson                    |
|--------------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------------|
|                           |   | Kelly M. Malson                                   |
|                           |   | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |

----
II 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 432 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exempt certain small businesses from the employer health insurance mandate and to modify the 

definition of full-time employee for purposes of such mandate. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 10, 2015 

Mr. ENZI (for himself, Mr. THUNE, Mr. BARRASSO, and Mr. PORTMAN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exempt 

certain small businesses from the employer health insurance mandate and to modify the definition of full-time 

employee for purposes of such mandate. 

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 ‘‘Small Business Fair5 ness in Health Care Act’’. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 432 IS

1 SEC. 2. RESTRICTIONS ON APPLICATION OF EMPLOYER 

2 HEALTH INSURANCE MANDATE. 

3 (a) EXCEPTION FOR SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS.— 

4 Section 4980H(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 

5 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new 

6 subparagraph: 

7 ‘‘(F) EXCEPTION FOR SMALL BUSINESS

8 CONCERNS.—The term ‘applicable large em9 ployer’ shall not include any employer which is 

10 a small business concern (within the meaning of 

11 section 3 of the Small Business Act).’’. 

12 (b) DEFINITION OF FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE.—Sec13 tion 4980H(c) of such Code is amended— 

14 (1) in paragraph (2)(E), by striking ‘‘by 120’’ 

15 and inserting ‘‘by 174’’, and 

16 (2) in paragraph (4)(A), by striking ‘‘30 hours’’ 

17 and inserting ‘‘40 hours’’. 

18 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

19 this section shall apply to months beginning after Decem20 ber 31, 2013. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS