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

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3093 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3093

               For the relief of Dmitry Efimovich Lyusin.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 4, 2011

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
               For the relief of Dmitry Efimovich Lyusin.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR DMITRY EFIMOVICH LYUSIN.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of section 
201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Dmitry Efimovich Lyusin 
shall be eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa or for adjustment 
of status to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence 
upon filing an application for issuance of an immigrant visa under 
section 204 of such Act or for adjustment of status to lawful permanent 
resident.
    (b) Adjustment of Status.--If Dmitry Efimovich Lyusin enters the 
United States before the filing deadline specified in subsection (c), 
he shall be considered to have entered and remained lawfully and shall, 
if otherwise eligible, be eligible for adjustment of status under 
section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as of the date of 
the enactment of this Act.
    (c) Deadline for Application and Payment of Fees.--Subsections (a) 
and (b) shall apply only if the application for issuance of an 
immigrant visa or the application for adjustment of status is filed 
with appropriate fees within 2 years after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
    (d) Reduction of Immigrant Visa Number.--Upon the granting of an 
immigrant visa or permanent residence to Dmitry Efimovich Lyusin, the 
Secretary of State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by 1, 
during the current or next following fiscal year, the total number of 
immigrant visas that are made available to natives of the country of 
the alien's birth under section 203(a) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act or, if applicable, the total number of immigrant visas 
that are made available to natives of the country of the alien's birth 
under section 202(e) of such Act.
    (e) Denial of Preferential Immigration Treatment for Certain 
Relatives.--The natural parents, brothers, and sisters of Dmitry 
Efimovich Lyusin shall not, by virtue of such relationship, be accorded 
any right, privilege, or status under the Immigration and Nationality 
Act.
                                 <all>
```
**EXHIBIT      32.(a)**

**Certification      Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted**

**Pursuant      to Section 906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

| (1) | the                Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company for the fiscal year ended                December 31, 2007 (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 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. |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |                                          |                         |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------|------------------------------|
|   |                                               |
|        |                                          | /s/              Peter Lewis |
|   | Name:                Peter Lewis              |
|   | Title:                Chief Executive Officer |

----
#### The Golden Rule.*

*(Circuit Court, E. D. Louisiana.*

November 18, 1881.)

1. Contracts — Evidence.

Parol evidence is inadmissible to vary the terms of a written contract.

2. Common Carrier — Delay in Delivery — Damages.

In the ordinary case of delay by a common carrier in delivering goods, the measure of damages is the difference in their market value at the time when actually delivered and when they should have been delivered.

In Admiralty.

*I. R. Beckwith*and *E.*D. *Craig,*for libellant.

*B. Egan,*for claimants.

*

Reported by Joseph. P. Horner, Esq., of the New Orleans bar.

Pardee, C. J.

This is a suit brought on a bill of lading to recover damages for the failure to deliver in time the goods shipped. The first question is as to whether the defendants had the right to disregard the bill of lading because of representations said to have been made by the drayman who delivered the goods to the steam-boat, to the steam-boat clerk, following which the goods were stowed as through freight for New Orleans, and not as way freight; so that when the proper landing was reached the goods could not be landed without great trouble and delay. The goods were, therefore, not landed on the down trip of the boat, but were landed on the return trip, causing a delay of about eight days. Such a defence cannot be listened to, as otherwise every bill of lading could be altered or varied by the recollections of a steam-boat mate, or the interference of disinterested parties. The carrying contract, reduced to writing in a bill of lading, can no more be altered or varied by parol evidence than any other written contract. See *The Delaware,*14 Wall. 579. But, outside of this, unauthorized parties certainly cannot change the contract between the ship and the shipper.

The other question is as to the rule of damages. The freight shipped was about 140 wheelbarrows, and the libellant claims that, at the place of landing, he had a contract or job to repair or build a levee, with 125 men in waiting to use the wheelbarrows; and that during, the delay the men could not work; and that libellant was compelled to keep and support the men at an expense of $1.25 each per day, thereby being damaged to that extent by the negligent failure of the defendant boat to deliver the freight in time. A statement of libellant’s claim seems to decide it against him, particularly as there is no showing whatever that the defendant boat was in anywise *335advised of the circumstances rendering the delivery of the wheelbarrows a matter of urgency. These damages claimed are consequential. Without notice of urgency and special contract the measure of damages, for delay in delivery of goods shipped by a common carrier, is the difference in the market value at the time of the delivery and the time when the goods should have been delivered. See Desty, Adm. § 256. As to any such difference in value there is no evidence.

The libel was properly dismissed in the district court, and the same decree will be entered in this court.
EX-4.1



 Exhibit 4.1 
  






 
 A LEADING INFRASTRUCTURE COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
CLASS A COMMON STOCK CUSIP E1O44C 107 SEE REVERSE FOR CERTAIN DEFINITIONS THIS CERTIFIES THAT IS THE OWNER OF FULLY PAID AND NON-ASSESSABLE
SHARES OF CLASS A COMMON STOCK, PAR VALUE OF $0.001 PER SHARE, OF construction partners, inc. transferable on the books of the Corporation in person or by attorney upon surrender of this certificate duly endorsed or assigned. This Certificate and
the shares represented hereby are subject to the laws of the State of Delware, and to the Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws of the Corporation, as now or as hereafter amended. This Certificate is not valid until countersigned by the Transfer
Agent. WITNESS the facsimile seal of the Corporation and the facsimile signatures of its duly authorized officers. i® EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PRESIDENT CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 0000001 







 



 
 The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate, shall be construed as though they were
written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: TEN COM—as tenants in common    UNIF GIFT MIN ACT- Custodian 
TEN
ENT—as tenants by the entireties    (Cust-) (Minor) IT TEN -as joint tenants with right of    under Uniform Gifts to Minors survivorship and not as
tenants    ^ct in common    (state) TTEE -trustee under Agreement dated     Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. For value
received,    hereby sell, assign and transfer unto PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS INCLUDING POSTAL ZIP CODE OF ASSIGNEE. Shares of the common stock
represented by this certificate and do hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint     attorney, to transfer the said stock on the books of the within-named corporation with full power of substitution in the premises.
DATED     NOTICE :The signature to this assignment must correspond with the name as written upon the face of the certificate in every particular without alteration or enlargement or any change whatever. SIGNATURE GUARANTEED: THE
SIGNATURE(S) SHOULD BE GUARANTEED BY AN ELIGIBLE GUARANTOR INSTITUTION, (BANKS, STOCKBROKERS, SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS AND CREDIT UNIONS WITH MEMBERSHIP IN AN APPROVED SIGNATURE GUARANTEE MEDALLION PROGRAM), PURSUANT TO S.E.C. RULE 17Ad-15.
CONGRESSIONAL PAY LIMITATION

TWENTY-SEVENTH AMENDMENT

No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of

Representatives shall have intervened.

REGULATING CONGRESSIONAL PAY

Referred to the state legislatures at the same time as those proposals that eventually became the Bill of Rights, the congressional

pay amendment had long been assumed to be dead.1 This provision

had its genesis, as did several others of the first amendments, in

the petitions of the states ratifying the Constitution.2 It was ratified, however, by only six states (of the eleven needed), and it was

rejected by five states. Aside from the idiosyncratic action of the

Ohio legislature in 1873, which ratified the proposal in protest of a

controversial pay increase adopted by Congress, the pay limitation

provision lay dormant until the 1980s. Then, an aide to a Texas

legislator discovered the proposal and began a crusade that culminated some ten years later in its ratification.3

Now that the provision is a part of the Constitution,4it will

likely play a minor role. What it commands was already statutorily

prescribed, and, at most, it may have implications for automatic costof-living increases in pay for Members of Congress.5

1 Indeed, in Dillon v. Gloss, 256 U.S. 368, 375 (1921), the Court, albeit in dictum, observed that, unless the inference was drawn that ratification must occur within

some reasonable time of proposal, “four amendments proposed long ago—two in 1789,

one in 1810 and one in 1861—are still pending and in a situation where their ratification in some of the States many years since by representatives of generations now

largely forgotten may be effectively supplemented in enough more States to make

three-fourths by representatives of the present or some future generation. To that

view few would be able to subscribe, and in our opinion it is quite untenable.” (Emphasis supplied).

2 A comprehensive, scholarly treatment of the background, development, failure, and subsequent success of this amendment is Bernstein, The Sleeper Wakes:

The History and Legacy of the Twenty-Seventh Amendment, 61 FORD. L. REV. 497 (1992).

A briefer account is The Congressional Pay Amendment, 16 Ops. of the Office of Legal Counsel, U.S. Dept. of Justice 102, App. at 127–136 (1992) (prelim. pr.).

3 The ratification issues are considered in the discussion of Article V, supra.

4 In the only case to date brought under the Amendment, the parties did not

raise the question of the validity of its ratification; the court refused to consider the

issue raised by an amicus. Boehner v. Anderson, 809 F.Supp. 138, 139 (D.D.C. 1992).

It is not at all clear the issue is justiciable.

5 See discussion of “Congressional Pay,” supra.

2307
<PAGE>


                                       
                                  EXHIBIT 23.1



                           CONSENT OF BDO SEIDMAN, LLP




















                                     -52-

<PAGE>
                                       
                                   CONSENT OF
                    INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS




Barringer Laboratories, Inc.
Golden, Colorado


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration 
Statement of our report dated February 13, 1997 relating to the consolidated 
financial statements of Barringer Laboratories, Inc. and subsidiaries 
appearing in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended 
December 31, 1996.



                                       BDO SEIDMAN, LLP



Denver, Colorado
March 24, 1997
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

                            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 Compuware Corporation (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), we, Peter Karmanos,
Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Laura L. Fournier, 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 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/ Peter Karmanos, Jr.
-------------------------------------
Peter Karmanos, Jr.
Chief Executive Officer
May 25, 2007


/s/ Laura L. Fournier
-------------------------------------
Laura L. Fournier
Chief Financial Officer
May 25, 2007
## U NITED 

## S TATES 

## A IR 

## F ORCE 

## C OURT OF 

## C RIMINAL 

## A PPEALS

_______ _______ __________ No. ACM 39471

_______ _______ __________ UNITED STATES Appellee

v. Brandon J. CARRIER Airman First Class (E

- 3 ) , U. S. Air Force, Appellant

_______ _______ __________ Appeal from the United Stat es Air Force Trial Judiciary

Decided 11 December 2018

_______ _______ __________ Military Judge : Christina M. Jimenez

. Approved sentence: Dishonorab le discharge, confinement for 2 years, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and r eduction to E

- 1 . Sentence adjudged 14 March 2018 by GCM convened at Laughlin Air Force Base, Texas

. For Appellant: Major Mark C. Bruegger , USAF. For Appellee: Lieutenant Colonel Joseph J. Kubler , US AF; Mary Ellen Payne , Esquire

. Befor e JOHNSON , DENNI S , and LEWIS , Appella te Military Judges

.

_______ _______ __________ This is an unpublished opinion and, as such, does not serve as precedent under AFCCA Rule of Practice and Procedure 18.4.

_______ _______ _____ _____

PE R CURIAM :The approved findings and sentence are correct in law and fact, and no error materially prejudicial to Appellant ’ s substantial rights occurred. Arti cles 59(a) and 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice , 10 U.S.C. §§ 859(a), 866(c).United States v. Carrier , No. ACM 39471

2 Accordingly, the approved findings and sentence are AFFIRMED

.

FOR THE COURT

CAROL K. JOYCE Clerk of the Court
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Transportation

###### Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

          - [Docket No. PHMSA-2016-0016]

# AGENCY:

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), DOT.

# ACTION:

Notice of OMB approval.

# SUMMARY:

The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS) is announcing OMB approval of the annual report for Underground Natural Gas Storage Facilities.

# DATES:

Operators should submit the first annual report form for the 2017 calendar year by March 15, 2018.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Crystal Stewart, Program Analyst, Office of Pipeline Safety Operations Systems Division, at 202-366-1524 or by email at                         *crystal.stewart@dot.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    PHMSA regulations at 49 CFR 191.17 require each operator of an underground natural gas storage facility to submit an annual report on DOT PHMSA Form 7100.4-1 by March 15, for the preceding calendar year, except that the first annual report must be submitted by July 18, 2017. PHMSA extended the due date for the submission of the first annual report, as stipulated in PHMSA's posting on its Web page (                    *https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/​underground-storage-annual-report-submission-extension*). This annual report, originally required by July 18, 2017, would have captured data for the 2016 calendar year. PHMSA is revising the date of the first submission of the annual report. The first annual report now will be due on March 15, 2018, and will collect reported information for the 2017 calendar year.                

                    OPS will post this information and further filing instructions on OPS's Web site at                     *http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/​pipeline.*

Issued in Washington, DC, on September 26, 2017, under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.97.

Alan K. Mayberry,

Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.

[FR Doc. 2017-21004 Filed 9-29-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 4910-60-P
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3128 Reported in House (RH)]

                                                 Union Calendar No. 406
112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3128

                          [Report No. 112-566]

To amend the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act 
  to adjust the date on which consolidated assets are determined for 
purposes of exempting certain instruments of smaller institutions from 
                          capital deductions.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 6, 2011

Mr. Grimm (for himself, Mrs. Maloney, Mr. King of New York, Mr. Meeks, 
 Ms. Hayworth, and Mrs. McCarthy of New York) introduced the following 
    bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services

                             June 29, 2012

    Additional sponsors: Mr. Ackerman, Mr. Renacci, and Mr. Stivers

                             June 29, 2012

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 
                       and ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act 
  to adjust the date on which consolidated assets are determined for 
purposes of exempting certain instruments of smaller institutions from 
                          capital deductions.

 

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

SECTION 1. DATE FOR DETERMINING CONSOLIDATED ASSETS.

    Section 171(b)(4)(C) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and 
Consumer Protection Act is amended by inserting after ``December 31, 
2009,'' the following: ``or March 31, 2010,''.
                                                 Union Calendar No. 406

112th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 3128

                          [Report No. 112-566]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

To amend the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act 
  to adjust the date on which consolidated assets are determined for 
purposes of exempting certain instruments of smaller institutions from 
                          capital deductions.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             June 29, 2012

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 
                       and ordered to be printed
```
EXHIBIT 99.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
            SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as
Co-Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Optimal Robotics Corp. (the
"Company"), does hereby certify that to the best of the undersigned's knowledge:

      1)    the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
            September 30, 2002 (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 results of operations
            of the Company.


Dated: October 30, 2002                    /s/ Neil S. Wechsler
                                           ---------------------------------
                                           Neil S. Wechsler
                                           Co-Chairman and
                                           Chief Executive Officer


                                     - 31 -