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

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3182 

For the relief of Hotaru Nakama Ferschke. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 10, 2009 

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

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

For the relief of Hotaru Nakama Ferschke. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR HOTARU 

4 NAKAMA FERSCHKE. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding subsections (a) 

6 and (b) of section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality 

7 Act, Hotaru Nakama Ferschke shall be eligible for 

8 issuance of an immigrant visa or for adjustment of status 

9 to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent resi10 dence upon filing an application for issuance of an immi11 grant visa under section 204 of such Act or for adjustment 

12 of status to lawful permanent resident. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3182 IH

1 (b) ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS.—If Hotaru Nakama 

2 Ferschke enters the United States before the filing dead3 line specified in subsection (c), she shall be considered to 

4 have entered and remained lawfully and shall, if otherwise 

5 eligible, be eligible for adjustment of status under section 

6 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as of the date 

7 of the enactment of this Act. 

8 (c) DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION AND PAYMENT OF

9 FEES.—Subsections (a) and (b) shall apply only if the ap10 plication for issuance of an immigrant visa or the applica11 tion for adjustment of status is filed with appropriate fees 

12 within 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

13 (d) REDUCTION OF IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBER.— 

14 Upon the granting of an immigrant visa or permanent res15 idence to Hotaru Nakama Ferschke, the Secretary of 

16 State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by 1, dur17 ing the current or next following fiscal year, the total num18 ber of immigrant visas that are made available to natives 

19 of the country of the alien’s birth under section 203(a) 

20 of the Immigration and Nationality Act or, if applicable, 

21 the total number of immigrant visas that are made avail22 able to natives of the country of the alien’s birth under 

23 section 202(e) of such Act. 

24 (e) DENIAL OF PREFERENTIAL IMMIGRATION

25 TREATMENT FOR CERTAIN RELATIVES.—The natural 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3182 IH

1 parents, brothers, and sisters of Hotaru Nakama 

2 Ferschke shall not, by virtue of such relationship, be ac3 corded any right, privilege, or status under the Immigra4 tion and Nationality Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 99.2
 
 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 Professional Lease Management Income Fund I, L.L.C., (the "Fund"), on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer of the Manager and of the Fund, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:
 
 (1)  the Report of the Fund filed today 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 Fund.
 
 
 
 
 /s/ Richard K Brock
 Richard K Brock
 Chief Financial Officer of PLM Financial Services, Inc.
 (Principal Financial Officer)
 March 29, 2004
H. R. 3319 

One Hundred Eleventh Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, 

the fifth day of January, two thousand and ten 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 440 South 

Gulling Street in Portola, California, as the ‘‘Army Specialist Jeremiah Paul 

McCleery Post Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. ARMY SPECIALIST JEREMIAH PAUL MCCLEERY POST 

OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 440 South Gulling Street in Portola, California, 

shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Army Specialist Jeremiah 

Paul McCleery Post Office Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Army Specialist Jeremiah Paul McCleery Post Office 

Building’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

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

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

PETER T. LITTLEFAIR,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

SERGEANT ARNE GOSNER, in his

individual and official capacity; et al.,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 09-35806

D.C. No. 3:08-cv-05476-BHS

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Washington

Benjamin H. Settle, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted August 30, 2010

Seattle, Washington

Before: HAWKINS, McKEOWN and BEA, Circuit Judges.

Peter Littlefair appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment

based on qualified immunity in favor of Sergeant Arne Gosner on Littlefair’s

claims brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C

§ 1291, and we affirm. 

FILED

SEP 15 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2

We review de novo the district court’s grant of summary judgment. Ewing

v. City of Stockton, 588 F.3d 1218, 1223 (9th Cir. 2009). Viewing the evidence in

the light most favorable to the nonmoving party and drawing all justifiable

inferences in its favor, we must “determine whether there are genuine issues of

material fact and whether the district court correctly applied the relevant

substantive law.” Id.

Where a plaintiff brings a § 1983 claim alleging false or omitted statements

in a search warrant affidavit, the standard for qualified immunity is governed by

Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (1978). Liston v. County of Riverside, 120 F.3d

965, 972 (9th Cir. 1997). To survive summary judgment for a claim for judicial

deception, a plaintiff “must make (1) a ‘substantial showing’ of deliberate

falsehood or reckless disregard for the truth and (2) establish that, but for the

dishonesty, the challenged action would not have occurred.” Id. at 973 (quoting

Hervey v. Estes, 65 F.3d 784, 788–89 (9th Cir. 1995)). “If a plaintiff satisfies these

requirements, ‘the matter should go to trial.’” Id. at 973 (quoting Hervey, 65 F.3d

at 789). 

Littlefair failed to show that Sergeant Gosner deliberately or recklessly made

false statements or omissions in his affidavit that were material to the finding of

probable cause for the search warrant of Littlefair’s property. As the Supreme
3

Court has noted, “qualified immunity . . . provides ample protection to all but the

plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.” Malley v. Briggs,

475 U.S. 335, 341 (1986). Sergeant Gosner’s conduct does not rise to this level,

and therefore he is entitled to qualified immunity.

Furthermore, the district court did not abuse its discretion when it excluded

portions of Littlefair’s declaration. Littlefair did not have personal knowledge to

offer such evidence under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(e). Even if the

district court did abuse its discretion, the error was harmless given that the

excluded evidence was cumulative of other evidence. See United States v.

Hinkson, 585 F.3d 1247, 1251, 1262 (9th Cir. 2009) (en banc). 

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 35.2
                  SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT (ITEM 1123)
                           HOMECOMINGS FINANCIAL, LLC
              RALI SERIES 2006-QO2 TRUST (THE "ISSUING ENTITY")

The undersigned,  a duly authorized  officer of Homecomings  Financial,  LLC, as
servicer (the "Servicer") pursuant to the applicable  servicing agreement,  does
hereby certify that:

1.   A review of the  Servicer's  activities  during the  period  covered by the
     Issuing  Entity's  report  on Form 10-K and of the  Servicer's  performance
     under  the   applicable   servicing   agreement  has  been  made  under  my
     supervision.

2.   To the  best of my  knowledge,  based  on such  review,  the  Servicer  has
     fulfilled all of its obligations under the applicable  servicing  agreement
     in all material respects throughout such period.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 26th
day of March 2007.

By:      /s/ Anthony N. Renzi
      ------------------------
      Name:  Anthony N. Renzi
      Title:    Managing Director
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3357 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.3357

                      One Hundred Eleventh Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
             the sixth day of January, two thousand and nine

                                 An Act

 
    To restore sums to the Highway Trust Fund and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. FUNDING OF THE HIGHWAY TRUST FUND.
    Subsection (f) of section 9503 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
(relating to determination of trust fund balances after September 30, 
1998) is amended--
        (1) by striking paragraph (2); and
        (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
        ``(2) Increase in fund balance.--Out of money in the Treasury 
    not otherwise appropriated, there is hereby appropriated (without 
    fiscal year limitation) to the Highway Trust Fund 
    $7,000,000,000.''.
SEC. 2. ADVANCES TO THE UNEMPLOYMENT TRUST FUND AND OTHER FUNDS.
    The item relating to ``Department of Labor--Employment and Training 
Administration--Advances to the Unemployment Trust Fund and Other 
Funds'' in title I of division F of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 
2009 (Public Law 111-8; 123 Stat. 754) is amended by striking ``to 
remain available through September 30, 2010'' and all that follows 
(before the heading for the following item) and inserting ``such sums 
as may be necessary''.
SEC. 3. FHA MORTGAGE INSURANCE COMMITMENT AUTHORITY.
    The item relating to ``Federal Housing Administration--Mutual 
Mortgage Insurance Program Account'' in title II of division I of the 
Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-8; 123 Stat. 966) is 
amended by striking ``$315,000,000,000'' and inserting 
``$400,000,000,000''.
SEC. 4. GNMA MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES GUARANTEE COMMITMENT AUTHORITY.
    The item relating to ``Government National Mortgage Association--
Guarantees of Mortgage-Backed Securities Loan Guarantee Program 
Account'' in title II of division I of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 
2009 (Public Law 111-8; 123 Stat. 967) is amended by striking 
``$300,000,000,000'' and inserting ``$400,000,000,000''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
EXHIBIT 32.1

Certification of Chief Executive 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-Q of Agile Software Corporation (the Company)
for the quarter ended October 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Jay B. Fulcher, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to my
knowledge:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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



|                    |  |                                       
|------------------- |  | --------------------------------------
|Date: March 5, 2007 |  | /S/    JAY B. FULCHER                 
|                    |  | Jay B. Fulcher Chief Executive Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Eric Jenkins, Appellant.

[665 NYS2d 583]

—Application by the appellant for a writ of error coram nobis to vacate, on the ground of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, a decision and order of this Court dated August 12, 1996 *(People u Jenkins,*230 AD2d 806), affirming a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered October 27, 1993.

Ordered that the application is denied.

The appellant has failed to establish that he was denied the effective assistance of appellate counsel *(see, Jones v Barnes,*463 US 745). Miller, J. P., O’Brien, Goldstein and McGinity, JJ., concur.
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.                  

###### National Science Foundation

The National Science Board's ad hoc Committee on Nominating the NSB Class of 2018-2024, pursuant to NSF regulations (45 CFR part 614), the National Science Foundation Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1862n-5), and the Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b), hereby gives notice of change in the scheduling of a teleconference for the transaction of National Science Board business.

# FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION OF PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT: 

The original notice for this meeting was published at 82 FR 47029, October 10, 2017.

# PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE OF MEETING: 

Friday, October 13, 2017 at 5:00-7:00 p.m. EDT.

# CHANGES IN MEETING: 

The teleconference meeting will be held on October 14, 2017 from 4:00-6:00 p.m. EDT.

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

                        Point of contact for this meeting is: Brad Gutierrez,                         *bgutierr@nsf.gov,*                         703-292-7000.                    

Chris Blair,

Executive Assistant to the NSB Office.

[FR Doc. 2017-22261 Filed 10-10-17; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
#### In the Matter of John Lowe, Petitioner, v William J. Bratton, as Police Commissioner of the City of New York, et al., Respondents.

[666 NYS2d 618]

—Determination of respondent Police Commissioner dated October 20, 1995, which dismissed petitioner from his position as a police officer, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Lewis Friedman, J.], entered May 16, 1996) dismissed, without costs.

Respondents’ determination that petitioner made false and misleading statements in the course of an investigation and that he associated with individuals known to the department to be drug dealers is supported by substantial evidence, including testimony, which the Hearing Officer was entitled to credit, from a drug dealer who stated that petitioner purchased drugs from her on a weekly basis. The penalty of dismissal is not shocking to our sense of fairness *(Trotta v Ward,*77 NY2d 827). Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Nardelli, Williams, Andrias and Colabella, JJ.
[No. 42923-3-II.

Division Two.

October 30, 2012.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Jessey Fern Reed, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Cowlitz County, No. 99-1-01242-6, Stephen M. Warning, J., entered November 30, 2011. *Reversed*and *remanded with instructions*by unpublished opinion per

Quinn-Brintnall, J.,

concurred in by Johanson, A.C.J., and Van Deren, J.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
PETER T. LITTLEFAIR, Plaintiff - Appellant,
v. SERGEANT ARNE GOSNER, in his individual and official capacity; et al., Defendants - Appellees. No. 09-35806 D.C. No. 3:08-cv-05476-BHS
MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington Benjamin H. Settle, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted August 30, 2010 Seattle, Washington Before: HAWKINS, McKEOWN and BEA, Circuit Judges. Peter Littlefair appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment based on qualified immunity in favor of Sergeant Arne Gosner on Littlefair’s claims brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C § 1291, and we affirm. 

# FILED
SEP 15 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 We review de novo the district court’s grant of summary judgment. Ewing v. City of Stockton , 588 F.3d 1218, 1223 (9th Cir. 2009). Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party and drawing all justifiable inferences in its favor, we must “deter mine whether there are genuine issues of material fact and whether the districtcourt correctly applied the relevant substantive law.” Id. Where a plaintiff brings a § 1983 claim alleging false or omitted statements in a search warrant affidavit, the sta ndard for qualified immunity is governed by Franks v. Delaware , 438 U.S. 154 (1978). Liston v. County of Riverside , 120 F.3d 965, 972 (9th Cir. 1997). To survive summary judgment for a claim for judicial deception, a plaintiff “must make (1) a ‘substantial showing’ of deliberate falsehood or reckless disregard for the truth and (2) establish that, but for the dishonesty, the challenged acti on would not have occurred.” Id . at 973 (quoting Hervey v. Estes , 65 F.3d 784, 788–89 (9th Cir. 1995)). “If a plaintiff satisfies these requirements, ‘the matter should go to trial.’” Id. at 973 (quoting Hervey , 65 F.3d at 789). Littlefair failed to show that Sergeant Gosner deliberately or recklessly made false statements or omissions in his affidavit that were material to the finding of probable cause for the search warrant of Littlefair’s property. As the Supreme3 Court has noted, “qualified immunity . . . provides ample protection to all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.” Malley v. Briggs , 475 U.S. 335, 341 (1986). Sergeant Gosner’s conduct does not rise to this level, and therefore he is entitled to qualified immunity. Furthermore, the district court did not abuse its discretion when it excluded portions of Littlefair’s declaration. L ittlefair did not have personal knowledge to offer such evidence under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(e). Even if the district court did abuse its discretion, the error was harmless given that the excluded evidence was cumula tive of other evidence. See United States v. Hinkson , 585 F.3d 1247, 1251, 1262 (9th Cir. 2009) (en banc)
. AFFIRMED.
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 Asyst Corporation (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ending October 31, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), We, Bob
Hall, President and director and Michael Vardakis, Secretary, Treasurer and
director 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:

     (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.


Date: 12/15/03                           /s/Bob Hall
     ---------                           --------------------------
                                         Bob Hall
                                         President and director

Date: 12/13/03                           /s/Michael Vardakis
     ---------                           --------------------------
                                         Michael Vardakis
                                         Secretary, Treasurer and director