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

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 282 

To require Federal contractors to participate in the E-Verify Program for 

employment eligibility verification. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 12, 2011 

Mr. GALLEGLY (for himself, Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr. ROYCE, Mr. ROHRABACHER, Mr. KINGSTON, Mr. BILBRAY, Mr. SHULER, and Mr. CALVERT) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Education and the 

Workforce, 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 require Federal contractors to participate in the E-Verify 

Program for employment eligibility verification. 

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

3 SECTION 1. REQUIREMENT FOR FEDERAL CONTRACTORS 

4 TO PARTICIPATE IN E-VERIFY PROGRAM. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 402(e)(1) of the Illegal 

6 Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 

7 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1324a note) is amended by adding at the 

8 end the following: 


eMCDONALD on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 282 IH

1 ‘‘(C) FEDERAL CONTRACTORS AND SUB2 CONTRACTORS.— 

3 ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—Any Federal con4 tractor described in clause (ii), and any 

5 subcontractor described in clause (iii), 

6 shall elect to participate in the E-Verify 

7 Program described in section 403(a) and 

8 shall comply with the terms and conditions 

9 of such election. 

10 ‘‘(ii) FEDERAL CONTRACTORS DE11 SCRIBED.—A Federal contractor is de12 scribed in this clause if the contractor— 

13 ‘‘(I) employs individuals; and 

14 ‘‘(II) has been awarded (and has 

15 not completed performance of) a con16 tract by the Federal Government for 

17 the procurement of goods or services 

18 in an amount exceeding the simplified 

19 acquisition threshold. 

20 ‘‘(iii) SUBCONTRACTORS DE21 SCRIBED.—A subcontractor is described in 

22 this clause if the subcontractor— 

23 ‘‘(I) employs individuals; and 

24 ‘‘(II) has been awarded (and has 

25 not completed performance of) a subVerDate Mar 15 2010 22:33 Jan 13, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H282.IH H282

eMCDONALD on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 282 IH

1 contract by a Federal contractor de2 scribed in clause (ii). 

3 ‘‘(iv) COVERAGE OF ENTIRE WORK4 FORCE.—In implementing this subpara5 graph, the Secretary of Homeland Security 

6 shall ensure that the E-Verify Program is 

7 applied to all of the employees of a Federal 

8 contractor or subcontractor, not just the 

9 employees performing the contract or sub10 contract, as the case may be.’’. 

11 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

12 subsection (a) shall apply to contracts entered into on or 

13 after the expiration of the 60-day period beginning on the 

14 date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


eMCDONALD on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the inclusion of our
report dated February 27, 2001, except with respect to Note 13, as to which the
date is March 30, 2001 included in Transcend Services, Inc.'s Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2000 as well as the incorporation by
reference of such reports into the Company's previously filed Registration
Statement File No. 033-57072, 033-41361, 033-37685, 033-59115, 333-32587, 333-
16213and 333-78777.

/s/ Arthur Andersen LLP

Atlanta, Georgia
April 6, 2001

                                      32
Exhibit 32.2


                                  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 the Annual Report of Jacobs  Financial  Group,  Inc.
(the  "Company")  on Form 10-K for the year  ended May 31,  2009 (the  "Report")
filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission,  I, John M. Jacobs,  Chief
Financial 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 14, 2009

                            By:
                               /s/John M. Jacobs
                               --------------------------------------
                               John M. Jacobs, Chief Financial Officer
**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 The Houston Exploration Company (the “Company”) on Form10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the “Report”), I, William G. Hargett, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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 theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and  2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.   /s/ William G. Hargett   Name:William G. Hargett  Title:Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer       The Houston Exploration Company     August 2, 2005
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                      11,738,125
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,105,131
<ALLOWANCES>                                   125,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            18,697,175
<PP&E>                                      16,816,061
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,274,859
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              34,011,876
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,062,046
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,340
<OTHER-SE>                                  69,666,834
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                34,011,876
<SALES>                                      6,318,144
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             6,318,144
<CGS>                                        5,478,213
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               13,231,213
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               748,954
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                22,421
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (12,888,203)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (12,888,203)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (12,888,203)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.97)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.97)
        

</TABLE>
CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF ALEXANDRIA

#### E. Eugene Gunter v. Georgia M. Platte

January 13, 1981

Case No. (Law) 6203

By JUDGE DONALD H. KENT

The Court, having considered the pleadings, argument of counsel and memoranda, finds that the Motion to Dismiss the Counterclaim should be granted. The jurisdiction of the Circuit Court is derivative of the jurisdiction of the General District Court for appealed cases. Since the sum sued for exceeds the jurisdiction of the General District Court, the Motion to Dismiss must be sustained. In addition, the counter-plaintiff has failed to comply with Rule 3:8 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Virginia.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
RETROSPETTIVA, INC. 10QSB FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2000 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          20,342
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  9,166,861
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            13,213,486
<PP&E>                                       1,056,340
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,385,972
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,929,583
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     6,765,480
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,690,909
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,385,972
<SALES>                                      6,429,651
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             6,429,651
<CGS>                                        5,510,954
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                6,295,780
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             105,368
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 30,020
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    30,020
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .01


</TABLE>
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2793 

To prohibit the Secretary of Agriculture from restricting certain hunting 

activities in the Kisatchie National Forest, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

AUGUST 5, 2011 

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

Committee on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To prohibit the Secretary of Agriculture from restricting 

certain hunting activities in the Kisatchie National Forest, 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. HUNTING IN THE KISATCHIE NATIONAL FOR4 EST. 

5 Consistent with the Act of June 4, 1897 (16 U.S.C. 

6 551), the Secretary may not restrict the use of dogs in 

7 deer hunting activities in the Kisatchie National Forest, 

8 unless such restrictions— 

9 (1) apply to the smallest practicable portions of 

10 such forest; and 


tjames on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2793 IH

1 (2) are necessary to reduce or control trespass 

2 onto land adjacent to such forest. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with BILLS
EX-34.8
(logo) pwc


Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors, PNC Financial Services Group, Inc.:

We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying Report on
Assessment of Compliance with Regulation AB Servicing Criteria, that Midland
Loan Services, a division of PNC Bank, National Association ("Midland" or the
"Company") complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the
Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB for the commercial
mortgage-backed securities transactions (the "Platform"), as of December 31,
2013 and for the year then ended, excluding criteria 1122(d)(1)(iii),
1122(d)(3)(i)(B), 1122(d)(3)(i)(C), 1122(d)(3)(i)(D), 1122(d)(3)(ii),
1122(d)(3)(iii), 1122(d)(3)(iv), and 1122(d)(4)(xv), which the Company has
determined are not applicable to the servicing activities performed by it with
respect to the Platform. Management is responsible for the Company's compliance
with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on
management's assertion based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly,
included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance
with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as
we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing
of selected asset-backed transactions and securities that comprise the Platform,
testing of selected servicing activities related to the Platform, and
determining whether the Company processed those selected transactions and
performed those selected activities in compliance with the applicable servicing
criteria. Our procedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing
activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report.
Our procedures were not designed to detect noncompliance arising from errors
that may have occurred prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have
affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during
the period covered by this report. We believe that our examination provides a
reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal
determination on the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management's assertion that Midland complied with the
aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2013 for the Platform is fairly stated, in all material respects.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

February 24, 2014


PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 1100 Walnut, Suite 1300, Kansas City, MO 64106
T: (816) 472 7921, F: (816) 218 1890, www.pwc.com/us
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED DE CEMBER 12, 2019

NO. 03

- 18

- 00077

- CR

Jeff Harold Gumtow, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 428TH DISTRICT COURT OF HAYS COUNTY BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE , JU STICES KELLY AND SMI TH

AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE SMITH

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed

the recor d a nd the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the

trial court’s judgment of conviction

. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment of

conviction

. Th e appellant shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and in the

court below.
**Exhibit
      32.2**





Certification
      of Chief Financial Officer


Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,


As
      Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the


Sarbanes
      - Oxley Act of 2002





I,
      Richard K Brock, Chief Financial Officer of PLM Financial Services, Inc., do
      hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
      that:




(i)  The
      Form
      10-KSB of PLM Equipment Growth Fund V Liquidating Trust (the Trust) for the
      period June 30, 2006 (inception) through December 31, 2006, (the Report) fully
      complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange
      Act
      of 1934, (15 U.S.C. 78m), and





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





Dated:
      March 26, 2007





/s/
      Richard K Brock


Richard
      K
      Brock


Chief
      Financial Officer of PLM Financial Services, Inc.


(Principal
      Financial Officer)








A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the
      Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





This
      certification accompanies the Form 10-KSB to which it relates, is not deemed
      filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated
      by reference into any filing of the Registrant under the Securities Act of
      1933
      or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made before or after the date
      of
      the Form 10-KSB), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained
      in such filing.
















































39
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           2,089
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,333
<ALLOWANCES>                                       776
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 9,034
<PP&E>                                           6,416
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,129
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  13,425
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           14,309
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           176
<OTHER-SE>                                     (1,478)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    13,425
<SALES>                                          1,806
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                11,498
<CGS>                                              306
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    6,397
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                23,030
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  99
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (17,875)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (17,875)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (17,875)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.03)


</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of Isaiah Brown, Appellant, v Glenn S. Goord, as Commissioner of Correctional Services, Respondent.

Submitted February 11, 2008;

decided March 20, 2008

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution and is not an order of the type provided for in CPLR 5602 (a) (2). Motion for poor person relief dismissed as academic.
EXHIBIT 11.1

CALCULATION OF WEIGHTED AVERAGE FOR THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2004



|BEGINNING BALANCE |                      | 17,883,015                      
|----------------- | -------------------- | --------------------------------
|DATE              | NO. OF SHARES
ISSUED | CONTRIBUTION TO
WEIGHTED AVERAGE
|February 6, 2004  | 12,000               |                                 
|February 13, 2004 | 15,000               |                                 
|March 30, 2004    | 10,000               |                                 
|March 31, 2004    | 10,000               |                                 



|Loss for the period     | $460,864  
|----------------------- | ----------
|Weighted average shares | 17,899,575
|Net Loss per share      | $(0.03)
* 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. 97-40916

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JUAN ANTONIO BARRON-REVILLA,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. L-97-CR-62-1

- - - - - - - - - -

April 10, 1998

Before JOLLY, JONES, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Juan Antonio Barron-Revilla appeals his sentence following a

guilty plea for reentry after deportation in violation of

8 U.S.C. § 1326. Barron-Revilla argues that he was charged with

and pleaded guilty to simple reentry following deportation under

§ 1326(a) and that he could not be sentenced under § 1326(b)

because the indictment did not allege that he had a prior

aggravated-felony conviction. His argument is foreclosed by the

Supreme Court’s decision in Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 

___ U.S. ___, 1998 WL 126904, at *3, *8 (U.S. Mar. 24, 1998).
No. 97-40916

-2-

AFFIRMED.
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas February 28, 2022 No 04-22-00068-CV In re STATE OF TEXAS Original Proceeding 1 

### O R D E R Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice On February 2, 2022, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus. This court believes a serious question concerning the mandamus relief sought requires further consideration. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 52.8(b). The respondent and the real parties in interest may file a response to the petition in this court

no later than ten (10) days from the date of this order. Any such response must conform to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.4. It is so ORDERED February 28, 2022. PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO:__________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, CLERK OF COURT

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 20-04-38777-MCVAJA, styled State of Texas v. Six Hundred Eight Thousand One Hundred Seventy-Seven Dollars and No Cents in United States Currency and 2007 Chevrolet G-3500 Van VIN# 1GAHG39U971127428 , pending in the 365th Judicial District Court, Maverick County, Texas, the Honorable Amado J. Abascal, III presiding.