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

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3329 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3329

To amend title 38, United States Code, to extend the eligibility period 
 for veterans to enroll in certain vocational rehabilitation programs.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            November 2, 2011

   Ms. Linda T. Sanchez of California (for herself, Mr. Donnelly of 
Indiana, Mr. Rush, Mr. Rangel, Mr. Filner, Mr. Benishek, and Mr. Braley 
   of Iowa) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 38, United States Code, to extend the eligibility period 
 for veterans to enroll in certain vocational rehabilitation programs.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF ELIGIBILITY PERIOD FOR VOCATIONAL 
              REHABILITATION PROGRAMS.

    (a) Extension.--Section 3103 of title 38, United States Code, is 
amended by striking ``twelve-year period'' and inserting ``fifteen-year 
period'' each place it appears.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply with respect to a veteran applying for assistance under chapter 
31 of title 38, United States Code, on or after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
```

[United States Government Policy and Supporting Positions (Plum Book), 1996]
[Independent Agencies and Government Corporations]
[National Commission on Libraries and Information Science ]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

The Plum Book (United States Government Policy
        and Supporting Positions): 1996 EditionBRANCH: EXECUTIVE NATIONAL COMMISSION ON LIBRARIES AND INFORMATION SCIENCELocationPosition TitleName of IncumbentPay PlanType of Appt.Level Grade or PayTenureExpiresWashington, DCPublic MemberJeanne H. SimonPDPAS$2255 years07/19/1997Washington, DCLibrarian/Information SpecialistMartha B. GouldPDPAS$2255 years07/19/1997Washington, DCPublic MemberC. E. AbramsonPDPAS$2255 years07/19/2000Washington, DCLibrarian/Information SpecialistShirley G. AdamovichPDPAS$2255 years07/19/1996Washington, DCPublic MemberWalter AndersonPDPAS$2255 years07/19/2000Washington, DCPermanent MemberJames H. BillingtonPDPAS$225..................Washington, DCPublic MemberLeVar BurtonPDPAS$2255 years07/19/2000Washington, DCPublic MemberJoan R. ChallinorPDPAS$2255 years07/19/1999Washington, DCLibrarian/Information SpecialistCarol K. DiPretePDPAS$2255 years07/19/1996Washington, DCPublic MemberMary S. FurlongPDPAS$2255 years07/19/1999Washington, DCPublic MemberFrank J. LucchinoPDPAS$2255 years07/19/1998Washington, DCLibrarian/Information SpecialistBobby L. RobertsPDPAS$2255 years07/19/1998Washington, DCPublic MemberGary N. SudduthPDPAS$2255 years07/19/1997Washington, DCPublic MemberJoel D. ValdezPDPAS$2255 years07/19/1998Washington, DCLibrarian/Information SpecialistRobert S. WillardPDPAS$2255 years07/19/1999Washington, DCAssociate Executive DirectorMary A. HedgeGSXS............................Washington, DCExecutive DirectorPeter R. YoungESNA............................
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         204,129
<SECURITIES>                                10,953,950
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,188,956
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    692,663
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            11,956,014
<PP&E>                                       9,340,672
<DEPRECIATION>                             (2,282,683)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              21,407,949
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,419,198
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       133,961
<OTHER-SE>                                  15,664,133
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                21,407,949
<SALES>                                      5,737,762
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,737,762
<CGS>                                        1,796,956
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,796,956
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             5,447,464
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             120,386
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,262,470)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,262,470)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,262,470)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.09)


</TABLE>
#### Ramapo Central School District Board of Education et al., Appellants, v David G. Adams et al., Respondents.

[862 NYS2d 114]

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for violation of RPTL 1222, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Nelson, J.), entered February 1, 2007, which denied their motion for summary judgment on the complaint and granted that branch of the defendants’ cross motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiffs brought this action, inter alia, to recover damages for violation of RPTL 1222 allegedly sustained as a result of the failure of the defendant David G. Adams, Assessor of the Town of Haverstraw (hereinafter the Assessor), to perform his allegedly ministerial duty to provide the plaintiff Ramapo Central School District (hereinafter the School District) with a revised assessment roll for the 2004-2005 tax year (see RPTL 1222, 1302). The Assessor’s failure to provide the revised assessment roll caused the School District to improperly calculate its tax levy based on an artificially high assessed value of the state-owned lands within the Town of Haverstraw, which resulted in the School District receiving $172,321.84 less in tax revenue for the 2004-2005 fiscal year.

On their cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, the defendants established their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law *(see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp.,*68 NY2d 320 [1986]), by demonstrating that the School District did not suffer any cognizable damages as a result of the Assessor’s omission *(cf. Siler v Lutheran Social Servs. of Metro. N.Y.,*10 AD3d 646, 648 [2004]). The reduction in revenue oc*325casioned by the Assessor’s inaction did not impact the operation of the School District, as the 2004-2005 School District budget resulted in a surplus, which was to be returned to the School District’s taxpayers in the form of a reduced tax levy the following year. Thus, the School District’s transfer of funds from its insurance reserve was unnecessary. Since, in opposition, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the defendants’ cross motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint *(see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp.,*68 NY2d 320 [1986]).

The plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are without merit. Rivera, J.P., Lifson, Covello and Balkin, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>


                                                                      EXHIBIT 32


                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                           AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       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 on Form 10-QSB of netGuru, Inc.
(the "Company") for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2005 (the
"Report"), each of the undersigned hereby certifies in his capacity as Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, respectively,
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, 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.

Dated: November 14, 2005                      By: /s/ AMRIT K. DAS
                                                  ------------------------------
                                                   Amrit K. Das
                                                   Chief Executive Officer
                                                   (principal executive officer)

Dated: November 14, 2005                      By: /s/ BRUCE K. NELSON
                                                  ------------------------------
                                                   Bruce K. Nelson
                                                   Chief Financial Officer
                                                   (principal financial officer)

         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version 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.
Here, the district court's June 13, 2013, order enforced the 

portion of the amended divorce decree allowing respondent to exercise an 

option to take possession of the marital residence if appellant failed to pay 

for respondent's share within the specified time. An order enforcing a 

prior order is not appealable as a special order after final judgment. 

Gumm, 118 Nev. at 920, 59 P.3d at 1225. Moreover, to the extent the 

district court denied appellant's countermotion to modify the divorce 

decree, that countermotion was not based on a change in circumstances 

because the asserted circumstances occurred prior to the entry of the 

amended divorce decree and were raised in an identical motion filed before 

the amended decree. Thus, appellant's challenge to respondent's 

ownership of the marital residence, is simply an attack of the amended 

divorce decree. Burton, 99 Nev. at 700, 669 P.2d at 705. Therefore, we 

conclude that the district court's order is not appealable as a special order 

after final judgment under NRAP 3A(b)(8). Further, because the portion 

of the district court's order awarding respondent attorney fees did not 

establish an amount of fees, but directed respondent's counsel to file a 

memorandum of fees and costs, the attorney fees award is not a final, 

appealable award. Accordingly, we lack jurisdiction over this appeal, and 

we 

ORDER this appeal DISMISSED.' 

Aa_A 

Hardesty 

'In light of this order, we deny as moot appellant's motion for a stay. 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 2 

(0) 1947n cep, 
cc: Hon. William B. Gonzalez, District Judge, Family Court Division 

Robert E. Gaston, Settlement Judge 

Cheri M. King 

Radford J. Smith, Chtd. 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 3 

(0) 1947A ci(51049
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-7177

JOSEPH KINARD, Petitioner - Appellant,
versus TRACY JOHNS; J. JOSEPH CURRAN, JR., The Attorney General of the State of Maryland, Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (8:07-cv-00132-DKC) Submitted: February 13, 2008 Decided: April 22, 2008 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joseph Kinard, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.1 Kinard’s notice of appeal states he is appealing the district court’s May 29, 2007 order and “any and all other decisions of the court in reference to the denial of his habeas corpus motion as well.” We construe Kinard’s notice of appeal as an attempt to appeal both the district court’s May 29, 2007 order denying Kinard’s motion for reconsideration and the district court’s January 26, 2007 order dismissing without prejudice Kinard’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as second or successive.
2 Kinard did not move for an extension of time to file his appeal under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5). - 2 - PER CURIAM: Joseph Kinard seeks to appeal the district court’s orders dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition and denying his subsequent motion for reconsideration. 1We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). 2 This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Dir., Dep’t of Corr. , 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson , 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). The district court’s orders were entered on the docket in January 2007 and May 2007, respectively. Kinard’s notice of appeal3 Because Kinard is a prisoner and filed his notice of appeal pro se, it is deemed filed on the date he gave it to prison officials for mailing. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack , 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988). July 27, 2007, is the date Kinard provided next to his signature on the notice of appeal. - 3 - was filed, at the earliest, on July 27, 2007. 3 Because Kinard failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period as to either of the district court’s orders, we dismiss the appeal. 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
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2661 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2661

  To amend title 18, United States Code, to increase the penalty for 
   violations of section 119 (relating to protection of individuals 
                  performing certain official duties).

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 2, 2009

Mr. Gohmert (for himself and Mr. Rooney) introduced the following bill; 
          which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend title 18, United States Code, to increase the penalty for 
   violations of section 119 (relating to protection of individuals 
                  performing certain official duties).

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Court Security Enhancement Act of 
2009''.

SEC. 2. INCREASE OF PENALTY.

    Section 119(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by 
striking ``5 years'' and inserting ``10 years''.
                                 <all>
```
CERTIFICATION FURNISHED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE


SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002, 18 U.S.C  SECTION 1350


The undersigned, Mark A. Ricca, is the Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Carver Bancorp, Inc.  (the “Company”).


This certification is being furnished in connection with the filing by the Company of the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10‐Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2011 (the “Report”).


By execution of this statement, I certify that:


|   |                                                                                                                                                    
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|a) | 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

|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                               
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|b) | 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.




Date:August 15, 2011/s/ Mark A. RiccaMark A. Ricca
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                           1,841
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 8,448
<PP&E>                                       4,961,248
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,076,217
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,910,724
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,067,676
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     2,610,470
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,910,724
<SALES>                                        999,710
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               999,710
<CGS>                                           22,889
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,265,472
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 9,809
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             140,421
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (428,881)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (428,881)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.16)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.16)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

Certifications Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350  As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the  SarbanesOxley Act of 2002

I, Marcel Martin, the Vice President Finance and Chief Financial Officer of Haynes International, Inc., certify that (i) the annual report on
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2007 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, and (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Haynes International, Inc. as of
the dates and for the periods set forth therein.

| |  | /s/ MARCEL MARTINMarcel Martin Vice President Finance and
     Chief Financial Officer
| |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |  | December 11, 2007Date                                                                 

I,
Francis J. Petro, the President and Chief Executive Officer of Haynes International, Inc., certify that (i) the annual report on Form 10-K for the
fiscal year ended September 30, 2006 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Haynes International, Inc. as of the dates and for the periods set forth
therein.

| |  | /s/ FRANCIS J. PETROFrancis J. Petro President and Chief Executive Officer
| |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |  | December 11, 2007Date                                                     

1

---



QuickLinks
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET - UNAUDITED AND CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF
INCOME AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          81,128
<SECURITIES>                                    37,495
<RECEIVABLES>                                   37,951
<ALLOWANCES>                                    (1,164)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               157,433
<PP&E>                                          27,978
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (10,348)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 186,865
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           41,877
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             4
<OTHER-SE>                                     144,465
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   186,865
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               143,178
<CGS>                                           17,200
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  103,182
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 44,217
<INCOME-TAX>                                    16,509
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    27,708
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.75
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.69
        

</TABLE>