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

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2519 

To amend the Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008 to prohibit peacekeeping 

operations assistance to countries that recruit and use child soldiers. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 13, 2011 

Mr. FORTENBERRY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Foreign Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend the Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008 to 

prohibit peacekeeping operations assistance to countries 

that recruit and use child soldiers. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS 

4 ASSISTANCE TO COUNTRIES THAT RECRUIT 

5 AND USE CHILD SOLDIERS. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 404(a) of the Child Sol7 diers Prevention Act of 2008 (22 U.S.C. 2370c–1(a)) is 

8 amended— 

9 (1) by striking ‘‘or 541’’ and inserting ‘‘, 541, 

10 or 551’’; and 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2519 IH

1 (2) by striking ‘‘or 2347’’ and inserting ‘‘, 

2 2347, or 2348’’. 

3 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

4 subsection (a) take effect on the date of the enactment 

5 of this Act and apply with respect to amounts made avail6 able for assistance under section 551 of the Foreign As7 sistance Act of 1961 that are unobligated or unexpended 

8 on or after such date. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         210,331
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  180,326
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (32,132)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                      18,203,037
<DEPRECIATION>                             (6,660,530)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              20,463,992
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          868,777
<BONDS>                                     12,821,077
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,774,138
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                20,463,992
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             7,696,684
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                9,131,351
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                32,259
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             904,667
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,371,593
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          2,371,593
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,371,593
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 (118.67)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (118.67)


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2     Section 1350 Certification of Chief Financial Officer.


In connection with the periodic report of Optika Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Steven M. Johnson, Chief Financial
Officer, Executive Vice President, Secretary and Chief Accounting Officer of the
Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18,
Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my
knowledge:

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

         (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
         the Company at the dates and for the periods indicated.

           8/13/2003                        /s/ Steven M. Johnson
      ------------------            ------------------------------------
            (Date)                            Steven M. Johnson
                                    Chief Financial Officer, Executive Vice
                                    President, Secretary and Chief Accounting
                                    Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOUND ON PAGES 3 THROUGH 5
OF THE COMPANY'S FORM 10 Q FOR THE PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 1998 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0001015527
<NAME> GEOLOGISTICS CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                          24,518
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  260,175
<ALLOWANCES>                                    17,512
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               311,756
<PP&E>                                          91,856
<DEPRECIATION>                                  12,766
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 491,106
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          282,871
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             2
<OTHER-SE>                                      20,824
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   491,106
<SALES>                                        736,875
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               736,875
<CGS>                                          554,480
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  736,823
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,337
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (7,512)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (2,236)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (5,276)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,276)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.50)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.50)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

COMMUNITY CENTRAL BANK CORPORATION
FORM 10-Q (continued)

                                   EXHIBIT 32

                             Rule 1350 CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the
undersigned hereby certifies in his capacity as an officer of Community Central
Bank Corporation (the "Corporation") that the Quarterly Report of the
Corporation on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2006 fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 and that the information contained in such report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Corporation as of the dates and for the periods presented in the financial
statements included in such report.


Dated: August 14, 2006                  By: /S/ DAVID A. WIDLAK
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            David A. Widlak;
                                            President and CEO
                                            (Principal Executive Officer)


Dated: August 14, 2006                  By: /S/ RAY T. COLONIUS
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Ray T. Colonius;
                                            Treasurer
                                            (Principal Financial and Accounting
                                            Officer)


                                       38
#### Max KAMIN, Plaintiff, v. The CENTRAL STATES FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

Civ. A. No. 15452.

United States District Court E. D. New York.

July 7, 1958.

Frederick E. Gromet, New York City, for plaintiff, by Samuel J. Sussman, Brooklyn, N. Y., of counsel.

Abrams & Bleich, New York City, for defendant, by Benjamin M. Haber, New York City, of counsel.

BYERS, Chief Judge.

This is a plaintiff’s motion to “quash the notices of deposition served on behalf of the defendant, each dated April 22nd, 1958, to take the respective depositions of Max Kamin, Joan Kamin and Jacob David Kamin, upon the ground that the depositions of the parties herein have already been taken by the defendant, and for such other etc.”

The notice of motion was dated April 25, 1958 but was not argued until June 18th. The notice complained of is directed only to the plaintiff.

It is said that the action is to recover under a policy of insurance issued to the plaintiff, for stolen jewelry.

It is undisputed that an “examination under oath” as provided for in the policy of insurance in suit, has been conducted on January 7 and 19, 1955 of the persons named. While the examinations were transcribed and signed, it is not thought that they were depositions within the meaning of Rule 26 et seq. of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A.

It was necessary for the plaintiff in order to conform to the terms of the policy, to submit to such an examination; as to the other parties named the same requirement may not have been present.

In order to induce the court to exercise its discretionary power under Rule 30(b) to order that the deposition of the plaintiff shall not be taken, more is required than is shown in the moving papers.

The subject is discussed, and authorities ■ cited, in Moore’s Federal Practice, Second Edition, at page 2025. The text indicates that “good cause” is needed “* * * and a strong showing is required before a party will be denied entirely the right to take a deposition.”

Since the moving papers do not survive this test, the motion is denied.

Settle order.
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (No. 033-54741,
No. 33-66516, No. 333-00903, and No. 333-13099) and in the Registration Statements on Form S-8
(No. 333-29711, No. 333-95255, No. 333-95259, No. 333-75732, No. 333-98107,
No. 333-103682 and No. 333-103684) of Western Gas Resources, Inc. of our report dated March 9, 2004, except for paragraph 2 of Note 2,
as to which the date is September 29, 2004, relating to the financial statements, which appears in this Form 10-K/A.

/s/
PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP

Denver,
Colorado 
November 1, 2004

---



QuickLinks
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 Jacobs  Financial  Group,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-K for the year ended May 31,  2008 (the  "Report")  filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission,  I, John M. Jacobs,  President 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:

                (1) The Company's Report fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

Date: September 08, 2008

                            By:
                               /s/John M. Jacobs
                               ---------------------------------------
                               John M. Jacobs, Chief Executive Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-6413

ROOSEVELT EISON, JR.,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; CHARLES M. CONDON,

Attorney General of the State of South

Carolina,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Charleston. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge.

(CA-99-682-9-24RB)

Submitted: May 25, 2000 Decided: June 6, 2000

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Roosevelt Eison, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief

Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on

February 24, 2000, the district court’s records show that it was

entered on the docket sheet on February 29, 2000. Pursuant to

Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is

the date that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we

take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. See

Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).

2

PER CURIAM:

Roosevelt Eison, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254

(West 1994 & Supp. 1999). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a

certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Eison v. South Carolina, No. CA-99-682-

9-24RB (D.S.C. Feb. 29, 2000).* 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.

DISMISSED
1

The Honorable Fernando J. Gaitan, Chief Judge, United States District Court

for the Western District of Missouri. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 08-3990

___________

Quet Sledge, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Western

* District of Missouri.

Michael J. Astrue, *

Social Security Commissioner, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellee. *

___________

Submitted: January 21, 2010

Filed: February 5, 2010

___________

Before BYE, RILEY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Quet Sledge appeals the district court’s1

 order affirming the denial of disability

insurance benefits. Sledge alleged disability since January 2005 from degenerative

joint disease, anxiety, and a bipolar disorder. After a September 2007 hearing, where

Sledge was counseled, an administrative law judge (ALJ) determined that Sledge had

engaged in substantial gainful activity until at least March 31, 2005; that her combined

physical and mental impairments were severe, but alone or combined, they did not
-2-

meet or equal the requirements of any listing; that her subjective complaints were not

entirely credible; and that based on a vocational expert’s response to the ALJ’s

hypothetical, Sledge’s mental residual functional capacity (RFC) and physical RFC

did not preclude her past relevant work as a data-entry worker, and further, she could

perform specified unskilled sedentary jobs existing in substantial numbers. The

Appeals Council denied review, and the district court summarily affirmed. Following

de novo review of the record, see Davidson v. Astrue, 578 F.3d 838, 841-42 (8th Cir.

2009), we affirm.

Contrary to Sledge’s primary assertions of error, we conclude that the ALJ gave

good reasons for discounting the low global-assessment-of-functioning ratings of

Sledge’s treating mental health providers. See Hacker v. Barnhart, 459 F.3d 934, 937

(8th Cir. 2006) (ALJ may elect in certain circumstances not to give controlling weight

to treating physician’s opinion, as record must be evaluated as whole; for treating

physician’s opinion to have controlling weight, it must be supported by medically

acceptable diagnostic techniques and not be inconsistent with other substantial

evidence in case record; physician’s own inconsistency may diminish or eliminate

weight accorded to his opinion). We also conclude that the ALJ’s mental RFC

findings are supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. See

Davidson, 578 F.3d at 844 (ALJ should determine RFC based on all relevant

evidence, including medical records, observations of treating physicians and others,

and claimant’s own description of her limitations). We reject as meritless Sledge’s

other arguments for reversal. Accordingly, we affirm.

______________________________
### IN THE S UP REME COURT OF TENNESS EE AT KNOXVI LLE

JAM ES A . D ELLIN GER v. S TAT E OF TEN NES SEE

No
. E 2 0 0 5 -0 1 4 8 5 -S C- R1 1 -PD

OR DE R - F iled Janu ary 22, 2009

On Aug ust 13, 2008, J am es A. De l linge r, the pe titioner, filed a Motion for D isclosure of Ev ide nc e F a vo ra

ble to t he Ap pe lla

nt P ursua nt to Br a dy

v. Mary land a nd the F e de ra l and

State Constit utions Rega

rding State Wit ness Charles H arla n. The State filed a response to the motion on Aug ust 22, 2008. This Court denied Delling er’ s motion i n an orde r date d Aug ust 26, 2008. On Aug ust 29, 2008, Dellinge r filed a Motion to R econside r, to Permit Oral Ar g ument on this Moti on, and to Strike the State’s Respo nse to Petitioner’s Motion for Disclosure of Evidenc e (“Motio n t o R ec onsider”) as we ll as a Motion That Court Take Judicial Notice. The State filed a
re sp on se to b oth

mot ion s o n Se pte mbe r 1 2, 20 08

. On No ve mbe r 3, 20 08 , D e lli ng e r f ile d a Re ply to State’s Response to Petitioner’s Motion to Reconsider Motion fo r Disclosure of Evidenc e, Motion to Strike St ate’ s Response, and Motion to Take Judicial Notice.

We conclude that Dellinge r has not shown g rounds for rec onsideration or for any other re lief reque sted in his Moti on to Reconsider. A s we s t at ed in the orig inal order of August 26, 2008, “[Dellinge r] forfe ited the issues raise d in his mot ion by failing to r aise them in the courts below.” Nor ha s Delling er shown g rounds to support his Motion That Court Take J udicial Notice. T he information at issue bec ame a vailable to De llinger

on May 4, 2005. The post-c onviction trial court enter ed its “F in d i n gs o f F act a nd Conclusions of L aw” on J une 2, 2005. De llinger offe rs no explanation for his failure to reque st permission to suppl ement the r ecor d by su bmitti ng the inf or ma tio n to the po st- c on vic tio n tr ia l c ourt wh ile tho se pr oc e e din g s we re pe nd ing or fo r his thr e e -y e a r d e lay

in r e qu e sti ngpe rm iss ion to s up ple me nt t

he re c or d o n a

pp e a l.

Acc ording ly , Delling er’ s Motion to Reconsider and Mot ion That C ourt Take J udicial Notice
are denied.

PER C URI AM
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



The undersigned executive officer of Black Rock Petroleum
Company certifies pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:

• the annual report on Form 10-K of the
Company for the year ended April 30, 2017, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and



• the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                         |                                                                                                       
|------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date:  February 28, 2020 | /s/ Zoltan Nagy
        Zoltan Nagy
        Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Director
EXHIBIT 32.1




ICONIX BRAND GROUP,
INC.


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
Iconix Brand Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended
December 31, 2009 (the “Report”), I, Neil Cole, President 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:





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




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





/s/
      Neil
  ColeNeil
ColePresident and Chief Executive
      Officer





February 26, 2010
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 183 (Friday, September 22, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 44377]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-20175]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Research Service


Notice of Intent To Grant Exclusive License

AGENCY: Agricultural Research Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Department of 
Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, intends to grant to Rainier 
Seeds, Inc. of Davenport, Washington, an exclusive license to the 
variety of crested wheatgrass described in Plant Variety Protection 
Application Number 201600403, `USDA-FORAGECREST,' filed on September 4, 
2016.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 23, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to: USDA, ARS, Office of Technology Transfer, 
5601 Sunnyside Avenue, Rm. 4-1174, Beltsville, Maryland 20705-5131.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian T. Nakanishi of the Office of 
Technology Transfer at the Beltsville address given above; telephone: 
301-504-5989.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Government's rights in this 
plant variety are assigned to the United States of America, as 
represented by the Secretary of Agriculture. It is in the public 
interest to so license this plant variety as Rainier Seeds, Inc. of 
Davenport, Washington has submitted a complete and sufficient 
application for a license. The prospective exclusive license will be 
royalty-bearing and will comply with the terms and conditions of 35 
U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. The prospective exclusive license may be 
granted unless, within thirty (30) days from the date of this published 
Notice, the Agricultural Research Service receives written evidence and 
argument which establishes that the grant of the license would not be 
consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7.

Mojdeh Bahar,
Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2017-20175 Filed 9-21-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-03-P