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

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2588 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture 

to sell certain Federal land, to direct that the proceeds of such sales 

be applied to reduce the Federal budget deficit, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 19, 2011 

Mr. POE of Texas introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on 

Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, 

in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary 

of Agriculture to sell certain Federal land, to direct 

that the proceeds of such sales be applied to reduce 

the Federal budget deficit, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘American Land Act’’. 

5 SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION TO SELL LAND. 

6 (a) AUTHORIZATION.—For each of fiscal years 2012 

7 through 2016, subject to valid existing rights, the SecVerDate Mar 15 2010 02:36 Jul 20, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2588.IH H2588

rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2588 IH

1 retary of the Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture, as 

2 the case may be, shall offer for competitive sale by auction 

3 all right, title, and interest, to the extent provided in sub4 section (b)(2), in and to the following: 

5 (1) Eight percent of the Federal land managed 

6 by the Bureau of Land Management. 

7 (2) Eight percent of the National Forest Sys8 tem land. 

9 (b) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.— 

10 (1) CONFIGURATION OF LAND.—The Secretary 

11 concerned shall configure the land to be sold to 

12 maximize marketability or achieve management ob13 jectives, and may prescribe such terms and condi14 tions on the land sales authorized by this Act as the 

15 Secretary deems in the public interest. 

16 (2) MINERAL RIGHTS.—For each fiscal year, 

17 the Secretary concerned may include in the sale of 

18 land under subsection (a) the mineral rights to such 

19 land for not more than 50 percent of the total acre20 age sold under subsection (a) by that Secretary, if 

21 the Secretary determines that such inclusion is likely 

22 to maximize marketability. 

23 SEC. 3. PROCEEDS FROM THE SALE OF LAND. 

24 All proceeds from the sale of land under this Act shall 

25 be deposited into the Treasury and applied— 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2588 IH

1 (1) to reduce the annual Federal budget deficit 

2 for the fiscal year in which the sums are received, 

3 except as provided in paragraph (2); and 

4 (2) if there is no annual Federal budget deficit 

5 for the fiscal year in which the sums are received, 

6 to reduce the outstanding Federal debt. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Charles & Colvard, Ltd. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, George R. Cattermole, Interim 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, to my knowledge, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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



|                               
|-------------------------------
|/s/ George R. Cattermole       
|George R. Cattermole           
|Interim Chief Executive Officer
|August 14, 2009                

This Certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and shall not be incorporated by
reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, whether made before or after the date of this Report, irrespective of any general incorporation language
contained in such filing.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 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.
Order entered August 26, 2014

In The



## Court of Appeals

**Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

No. 05

- 13

- 00524

- CV

BRIAN CAYCE BERTRAND

, Appellant

V.

JOHN DAVID BERTRAND AND ANDREA GAIL ROBI NSON BETRAND, Appellee s

On Appeal from the 191st Judicial Distric t Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 11

- 15646



### O RDER

We ORDER the District Clerk to file before August 29, 2014 a supplemental clerk’s

record containing the March 28, 2013 letter to the Honorable Gena Slaughter from Coyt Randal

Johnston, Jr.

/Carolyn Wright/

CAROLYN WRIGHT

CHIEF JUSTICE
*Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. 

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 01-60793

_____________________

LINDA NICHOLS; TANYATAMEIKA JACKSON; 

BENNIE SMITH; VICKI MCNEIL,

Plaintiffs - Appellees,

versus

CITY OF CANTON, MISSISSIPPI; ET AL.,

Defendants,

CITY OF CANTON, MISSISSIPPI,

Defendant - Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No.3:00-CV-110-LN

_________________________________________________________________

March 18, 2003

Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and JONES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

After consideration of the briefs, the oral arguments, and

the record in this case and, in particular, after having reviewed

National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Morgan, 536 U.S. 101 (2002),

we are convinced that the plaintiffs’ claims were not time-barred

and that the jury’s finding of liability in this case should not
be disturbed. We agree with the appellants that in some

instances the district court allowed unfairly prejudicial

evidence against the city into the record. We have thoroughly

considered these evidentiary errors and have concluded that they

were harmless in the light of the overwhelming relevant evidence

that supports the verdict. Finally, given the egregious nature

of the conduct of Canton Police Chief Milton Luckett and the

severe and pervasive hostile work environment that his actions

created, we are slightly surprised that the amount of the damage

awards was no greater – the surprisingly low amount perhaps

attributable to the skill of the city’s attorneys. Nevertheless,

based on our somewhat-varying precedents upholding damage awards,

we cannot say that the jury’s award of damages was unreasonable. 

Consequently, the jury verdict and the judgment of the district

court are, in all respects,

AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 180 (Tuesday, September 19, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43770-43771]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-19858]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of Closed 
Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as

[[Page 43771]]

amended, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the Clinical Trials 
Review Committee.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Heart, Lung, and Blood Initial Review Group; 
Clinical Trials Review Committee.
    Date: October 26, 2017.
    Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Hilton Garden Inn Bethesda, 7301 Waverly Street, 
Bethesda, MD 20814.
    Contact Person: Keary A Cope, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, 
Office of Scientific Review/DERA, National Heart, Lung, and Blood 
Institute, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7190, Bethesda, MD 20892-7924, 
301-827-7912, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c4a7abb4a1afa584a9a5ada8eaaaadaceaa3abb2"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c7a4a8b7a2aca687aaa6aeabe9a9aeafe9a0a8b1">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.233, 
National Center for Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and 
Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; 93.839, 
Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes of 
Health, HHS)

    Dated: September 13, 2017.
Michelle Trout,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2017-19858 Filed 9-18-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

JOHN BEHLING

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 17

- 1481

[ March 29, 2018 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for

the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County ; Gary L. Sweet , Judge;

L.T. Case No. 2014CF001874A

.

John Behling, Orlando, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Mitchell A.

Egber, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

T

AYLOR

, C IKLIN and L EVINE

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 250 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 250

To provide discretionary authority to an immigration judge to determine 
  that an alien parent of a United States citizen child should not be 
     ordered removed, deported, or excluded from the United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 7, 2011

 Mr. Serrano introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide discretionary authority to an immigration judge to determine 
  that an alien parent of a United States citizen child should not be 
     ordered removed, deported, or excluded from the United States.

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

SECTION 1. DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY WITH RESPECT TO REMOVAL, 
              DEPORTATION, OR EXCLUSION OF PARENTS OF CITIZEN CHILDREN.

    Section 240(c)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
1229a(c)(4)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
                    ``(D) Discretion of judge in case of citizen 
                child.--In the case of an alien subject to removal, 
                deportation, or exclusion who is the parent of a child 
                who is a citizen of the United States, the immigration 
                judge may exercise discretion to decline to order the 
                alien removed, deported or excluded from the United 
                States if the judge determines that such removal, 
                deportation, or exclusion is clearly against the best 
                interests of the child, except that this subparagraph 
                shall not apply to any alien who the judge determines--
                            ``(i) is described in section 212(a)(3) or 
                        237(a)(4); or
                            ``(ii) has engaged in conduct described in 
                        paragraph (8) or (9) of section 103 of the 
                        Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (22 
                        U.S.C. 7102).''.
                                 <all>
```
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

TIRATH SINGH,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 09-72055

Agency No. A098-528-306

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted April 17, 2012** 

Before: LEAVY, PAEZ and BEA, Circuit Judges.

Tirath Singh, native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of

Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s

decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief

under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8

FILED

APR 23 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 09-72055

U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence. Gonzalez-Hernandez v.

Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 995, 998 (9th Cir. 2003). We deny the petition for review. 

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that, even if Singh is

credible and was persecuted on account of a protected ground, the government

rebutted the presumption of a well-founded fear of future persecution by

establishing changed circumstances in India. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(b)(1)(i)(A)

and (ii); see also Gonzalez-Hernandez, 336 F.3d at 998-1001. The agency

rationally construed evidence in the record and provided a sufficiently

individualized analysis of Singh’s future fear. See id. at 1000. We reject Singh’s

contentions that the BIA failed to consider all relevant evidence. See LaritaMartinez v. INS, 220 F.3d 1092, 1095-96 (9th Cir. 2000) (petitioner must

overcome the presumption that the agency has considered all the evidence). 

Accordingly, Singh’s asylum claim fails. 

Because Singh failed to establish eligibility for asylum, he necessarily failed

to meet the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. See GonzalezHernandez, 336 F.3d at 1001, n.5. 

Finally, substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief

because Singh failed to show it is more likely than not that he will be tortured in
3 09-72055

India. See Sowe v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 1281, 1288-89 (9th Cir. 2008) (evidence of

changed country conditions in Sierra Leone defeated CAT claim).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
HENRIETTA LEANA NICOL, Petitioner,

v. No. 96-1810 U.S. IMMIGRATION& NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A71-795-237) Submitted: March 31, 1997 Decided: April 25, 1997 Before HALL and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.

_________________________________________________________________ Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL Randall L. Johnson, Arlington, Virginia, for Petitioner. Frank W.Hunger, Assistant Attorney General, David V. Bernal, Senior Litigation Counsel, Jane R. Gomez, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

_________________________________________________________________Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________ OPINION
PER CURIAM: Henrietta Leana Nicol petitions for review of a final order of the Board of Immigration Appeals denying her application for asylum and withholding of deportation. We deny the petition. Nicol challenges the Immigration Judge's finding that she was not credible based upon inconsistencies between her testimony and the information she supplied in two applications for asylum. AnImmigration Judge's credibility determination is to be granted substantialdeference and is reviewed under a substantial evidence standard. See Figeroa v. INS , 886 F.2d 76, 78 (4th Cir. 1989) (stating thatImmigration Judge who rejects a witness' posi tive testimony based on a lack of credibility should offer specific reasons for disbelief). In Nicol's case, the Immigration Judge offered several concrete examples of contradictions noted between Nicol's testimony and her asylumapplications which led to his conclusion that her testimony was notcredible. Nicol concedes these inconsistencies, but argues that she explained them and that the Immigration Judge's determination that she was not credible on the basis of these inconsistencies was a"misinterpretation of the facts and law." In support of this argument, Nicol cites to two Ninth Circuit cases: Platero-Cortez v. INS , 804 F.2d 1127 (9th Cir. 1986), and Damaize-Job v. INS , 787 F.2d 1332 (9th Cir. 1986). We find these cases to be distinguishable from Nicol's factual situa tion, and therefore unconvincing. Accordingly, we find no reason to reverse either the Immigration Judge's finding that Nicol was not credible or his subsequent denial of her request for asylum on that basis. We therefore deny Nicol's petition. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequatelypresented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.PETITION DENIED
2
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2767 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2767

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           December 14, 2011

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 8 West Silver Street in Westfield, Massachusetts, as the ``William 
                    T. Trant Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. WILLIAM T. TRANT POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 8 West Silver Street in Westfield, Massachusetts, shall be 
known and designated as the ``William T. Trant Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``William T. 
Trant Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives December 13, 2011.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       7,772,920
<SECURITIES>                                 6,007,397
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            13,846,896
<PP&E>                                          54,275
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,813,473
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,069,473
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        77,204
<OTHER-SE>                                  14,794,475
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,813,473
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                71,640
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  660,095
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             365,814
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (954,269)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (954,269)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (954,269)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.31)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.31)
        


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2

      STATEMENT FURNISHED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
                     ACT OF 2002, 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

The undersigned, Deborah A. McLaughlin, is the Chief Financial Officer and
Chief Operating Officer of Slade's Ferry Bancorp. (the "Company"). This
statement is being furnished in connection with the filing by the Company
of the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2005 (the "Report").

By execution of this statement, I certify that:

      1)    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(a) 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 the Company as of the dates and for the periods
            covered by the Report.

This statement is authorized to be attached as an exhibit to the Report so
that this statement will accompany the Report at such time as the Report is
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not
intended that this statement be deemed to be filed for purposes 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.


March 31, 2006                         /s/ Deborah A. McLaughlin
--------------------                   ------------------------------------
(Date)                                 Deborah A. McLaughlin
                                       Executive Vice President
                                       Chief Financial Officer/
                                       Chief Operations Officer


<PAGE>