alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
H. R. 3435 

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 

Making supplemental appropriations for fiscal year 2009 for the Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Program. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 

following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury 

not otherwise appropriated, for the fiscal year ending September 

30, 2009, and for other purposes, namely: 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

CONSUMER ASSISTANCE TO RECYCLE AND SAVE PROGRAM

(TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

For an additional amount for ‘‘Consumer Assistance to Recycle 

and Save Program’’ to carry out the Consumer Assistance to Recycle 

and Save Program established by the Consumer Assistance to 

Recycle and Save Act of 2009 (title XIII of Public Law 111–32), 

not to exceed $2,000,000,000, to remain available until September 

30, 2010: Provided, That such amount shall be available for such 

purpose only to the extent directed by the President, and shall 

be derived by transfer from the amount made available for ‘‘Department of Energy—Energy Programs—Title 17—Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program’’ in title IV of division A of the 

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 

111–5): Provided further, That the amount under this heading 

is designated as an emergency requirement and necessary to meet 

emergency needs pursuant to sections 403 and 423(b) of S. Con. 

Res. 13 (111th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget 

for fiscal year 2010. 

Section 1302(g) of Public Law 111–32 is amended by inserting 

the following new paragraph: 

‘‘(3) REVIEW OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE PROGRAM BY

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE AND INSPECTOR GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the termination date 

described in subsection (c)(1)(A), the Government Accountability 

Office and the Inspector General of the Department of 

Transportation shall submit reports to the Committee on 

Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and 
H. R. 3435—2 

the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of 

the Senate reviewing the administration of the program.’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3378 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to designate the Dr. Norman 

E. Borlaug Birthplace and Childhood Home in Cresco, Iowa, as a National Historic Site and unit of the National Park System, and for 

other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 29, 2009 

Mr. LATHAM (for himself, Mr. BRALEY of Iowa, Mr. LOEBSACK, Mr. BOSWELL, and Mr. KING of Iowa) introduced the following bill; which was 

referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to designate the 

Dr. Norman E. Borlaug Birthplace and Childhood Home 

in Cresco, Iowa, as a National Historic Site and unit 

of the National Park System, 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. DR. NORMAN E. BORLAUG BIRTHPLACE AND 

4 CHILDHOOD HOME NATIONAL HISTORIC 

5 SITE. 

6 (a) ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY; ESTABLISHMENT OF

7 HISTORIC SITE.—Should the Secretary of the Interior acVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:20 Jul 30, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H3378.IH H3378

jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3378 IH

1 quire, by donation from the Norman Borlaug Heritage 

2 Foundation, fee simple, unencumbered title to the Norman 

3 E. Borlaug Birthplace site located at 20399 Timber Ave4 nue, Cresco, Iowa, and the Norman E. Borlaug Childhood 

5 Home site located at 19518 200th Street, Cresco, Iowa, 

6 and any personal property related to the sites, the Sec7 retary shall designate that property as a National Historic 

8 Site and unit of the National Park System to be known 

9 as the ‘‘Dr. Norman E. Borlaug Birthplace Home Na10 tional Historic Site’’. 

11 (b) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER LAWS.—The Sec12 retary shall administer the Dr. Norman E. Borlaug Birth13 place Home National Historic Site in accordance with the 

14 laws generally applicable to national historic sites, includ15 ing the Act titled ‘‘An Act to establish a National Park 

16 Service, and for other purposes’’, approved August 25, 

17 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1–4), and the Act titled ‘‘An Act to pro18 vide for the preservation of historic American sites, build19 ings, objects and antiquities of national significance, and 

20 for other purposes’’, approved August 21, 1935 (16 

21 U.S.C. 461 et seq.). 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 32.2

                           Section 1350 Certification

         In connection with the Form 10-QSB of China Direct, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Yi
(Jenny) Liu, Vice President of Finance of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

         (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.

May 9, 2007                         /s/ Yi (Jenny) Liu
                                    ------------------
                                    Yi (Jenny) Liu, Vice President of Finance,
                                    principal accounting and 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
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.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Robert Leslie BAYS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-10206

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

April 19, 2011.

Nancy E. Larson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Frederick M. Schattman, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District Of Texas, Fort Worth, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Donel Lee Davidson, Bedford, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before JOLLY, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Robert Leslie Bays has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), *383and *United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir.2011). Bays has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 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 Cm. R. 47.5.4.
Exhibit 31.2  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO RULE 13a - 14(a) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT 0F 1934, AS AMENDED, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  I, Dean H. Becker certify that:  1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of CoConnect, Inc.  2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.  4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a -15(e) and 15d -15(e)) for the registrant and have:  a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and  5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):  a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.   /s/ Dean H. Becker Dean H. Becker, Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)  August 21, 2006
#### INDIAN MOUNTAIN COAL COMPANY; Old Republic Insurance Company, Petitioners, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS; Emily Bolling, Respondents.

No. 10-1860.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 29, 2011.

Decided: April 8, 2011.

Mark E. Solomons, Laura Metcoff Klaus, Greenberg Traurig LLP, Washington, D.C., for Petitioners. M. Patricia Smith, Solicitor of Labor, Rae Ellen James, Associate Solicitor, Patricia M. *261Nece, Counsel for Appellate Litigation, Barry H. Joyner, United States Department of Labor, Washington, D.C.; Joseph E. Wolfe, Ryan C. Gilligan, Wolfe, Williams, Rutherford & Reynolds, Norton, Virginia, for Respondents.

Before AGEE, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Indian Mountain Coal Company and Old Republic Insurance Company seek review of the Benefits Review Board’s decision and order affirming the administrative law judge’s award of black lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C. §§ 901-945 (2006). Our review of the record discloses that the Board’s decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error. Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. *Indian Mountain Coal Co. v. Director, Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs,*No. 09-0180-BLA (BRB Sept. 23, 2009). 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.

*PETITION DENIED.*
Exhibit 33.1.2.1

[Letterhead of REGULUS]


Report on Assessment of Compliance with Regulation AB Servicing Criteria

1. Pursuant to Subpart 229.1100 - Assest Backed Securities, 17 C.F.R.
229.1100-229.1123 ("Regulation AB"), Regulus Group LLC, for itself and its
wholly-owned subsidiaries (individually and collectively "Regulus"), is
responsible for assessing its compliance with the servicing criteria applicable
to the remittance processing services it provides to customers who are issuers
or servicers of asset backed securities transactions and who have requested
confirmation of Regulus' compliance in connection with loan and/or receivables
portfolios that include pool assets for asset backed securities transactions
(the "Platform"). Remittance processing is a service whereby check payments
that are remitted by mail to a post office box are collected, processed through
a highly automated data capture system, and prepared for deposit to a bank
account held by the beneficiary of the payment.

2. The servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB were used
in Regulus' assessment of compliance. Regulus has concluded that the servicing
criteria set forth Items 1122(d)(2)(i) and 1122(d)(4)(iv) of Regulation AB are
applicable to the servicing activities it performs with respect to the Platform
(such criteria the "Applicable Servicing Criteria"). Regulus has concluded that
the remainder of the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of Regulation
AB are inapplicable to the activities it performs with respect to the Platform
because Regulus does not participate in the servicing activities referenced by
such servicing criteria.

3. As of and for the year ending December 31, 2006, Regulus has complied in all
material respects with the Applicable Servicing Criteria set forth in Item
1122(d) of Regulation AB.

4. KPMG LLP, a registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation
report on Regulus' assessment of compliance with the Applicable Servicing
Criteria as of and for the year ending December 31, 2006. A copy of that
attestation report is attached hereto as Exhibit A.


/s/ Kimberlee Clark
Kimberlee Clark
Chief Financial Officer

February 22, 2007
August 21, 2014

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NICHOLAS JARED MIRELES, Appellant

NO. 14-13-00333-CR V.

NO. 14-13-00334-CR

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

________________________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. 

Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the 

judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
Supply Agreement dated December 29, 2006



 Exhibit 10.ii.f 
 

 
 SUPPLY AGREEMENT 
 URUGUAY 
  

			
	DATE:	  	December 29, 2006
		
	SELLER:	  	MOSAIC FERTILIZER, LLC
		  	8813 HWY 41 SOUTH
		  	RIVERVIEW, FL 33569
		
	BUYER:	  	CROP URUGUAY S.A.
		  	Plaza Independencia 831
		  	Piso 9° Oficina 908
		  	Montevideo
		  	Rep. Oriental del Uruguay
		
	PRODUCT:	  	DAP AND MAP
		
	SPECIFICATIONS:	  	SPECIFICATIONS ATTACHED PURSUANT TO GEOGRAPHIC LOCATIONS
		
	MARKET:	  	URUGUAY
		
	PERIOD:	  	JULY – AUGUST 2006
		
	PRICING:	  	MAP AT $293/mt CFR Uruguay
		  	DAP AT $291//mt CFR Uruguay
		
	QUANTITY:	  	5,700mt MAP +/-10%
		  	1,600mt DAP +/-10%
		
	DELIVERY:	  	AUGUST 2006
		
	PAYMENT:	  	WIRE TRANSFER UPON RECEIPT OF DOCUMENTS
		
	TERMS:	  	MOSAIC TERMS AND CONDITIONS TO APPLY. (SEE ATTACHED)

  

									
	CROP URUGUAY S.A.	 		 	MOSAIC FERTILIZER, LLC
					
	By:	 	  
	 		 	By:	 	  

	Name:	 	  
	 		 	Name:	 	  

	Its:	 	  
	 		 	Its:
Exhibit 99.01





CERTIFICATIONS 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 NetScreen Technologies, Inc. Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the Report), I, Robert D. Thomas, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge based upon a review of the Report, that the Report fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
NetScreen Technologies, Inc. for the quarterly period covered by the Report.





By:

/s/    ROBERT D.
THOMASRobert D. Thomas President and
Chief Executive Officer, NetScreen Technologies, Inc.





In connection with the NetScreen Technologies, Inc. Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Remo E. Canessa, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, to the best of my knowledge based upon a review of the Report, that the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of NetScreen Technologies, Inc. for the quarterly period covered by the Report.





By:

/s/    REMO E.
CANESSARemo E. Canessa Chief
Financial Officer, NetScreen Technologies, Inc.
Exhibit 10.5



THIS SUPPLEMENTARY AGREEMENT is made on 1 January 2007



BETWEEN



CHINAWE.COM.INC., whose principal executive office is situated at Room 1304-05, Dongbao Tower, 767 Dongfeng Road East, Guangzhou, China 510600 (the ‘‘Company’’)



CHINAWE ASSET MANAGEMENT LIMITED, whose principal executive office is situated at 1307, 13/F., Block A, 66-68 Tong Mi Road, Kowloon, Hong Kong (‘‘CAM’’)



VIVIAN WAI WA CHU (‘‘Ms. Chu’’) of 1307, 13/F., Block A, 66-68 Tong Mi Road, Kowloon, Kong Kong



WHEREAS the Company is a corporation listed on the NASDAQ-OTCBB of the United States:     CAM is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company and Ms. Chu is a director of the Company.



This supplementary agreement is made to supplement the agreement dated 6 May 2003 made between the Company and Ms. Chu (the ‘‘Agreement’’).



NOW IT IS HEREBY AGREED as follows:


		
	(1) 	The loan pursuant to the Agreement (the ‘‘Loan’’) was actually used by CAM and CAM should have the obligations to repay the principal and interests outstanding to Ms. Chu; and


		
	(2) 	The repayment term of the Loan is extended to June 2007 while interest is charged at HK$20,153.80 per month from 30 June 2004 onwards.



Other terms in the Agreement remain the same.






							
	 			 			 
	CHINAWE.COM INC.			CHINAWE ASSET


MANAGEMENT LIMITED			VIVIAN WAI WA CHU
	 			 			 
	By: /s/ Man Keung Alan Wai			By: /s/ Man Keung Alan Wai			    /s/ Vivian Wai Wa Chu
	Name: Man Keung Alan Wai			Name: Man Keung Alan Wai			 
	Title: CEO & President			Title: CEO & President
#### MORTGAGE LINE OF CT, LLC *v.*TULLAT MAHMOOD ET AL.

(AC 33319)

Robinson, Alvord and Espinosa, Js.

Argued February 9

officially released February 28, 2012

Per Curiam.

The judgment is affirmed and the case is remanded for the purpose of setting new sale dates.
INTHE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF SUPREME COURT HELENA, MONTANA 59620-3003 Suprerne Court No. DA 21-0318 DANIEL L. MORLEY, Plaintiff and Appellee, V. CYNTHIA

J. MORLEY and KENNETH
E. MORLEY, Defendants and Appellants.
GRANT OF EXTENSION Pursuant
to authority granted under M.R. App.P. 26(1), Appellant

is given anextension of tirne until September 22, 2021, to prepare, file, and servethe Appellant's_brief. DATED this July 23, 2021

Bowen Greenwood Clerk of the Supreme Court c: Craig D. Charlton, Lewis Kelsey Smith, III., Kenneth Alan Connors, Patrick T. Fox PO BOX 203003
•HELENA MT•59620-3003

•TELEPHONE: (406) 444-3858

•FAX: (406) 444-570507/23/2021Case Number: DA 21-0318
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellant, v. Kenneth Lee MAHONEY, Jr., Appellee.

No. 10-3374.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: Nov. 3, 2010.

Filed: Dec. 08, 2010.

Jennifer Kiemetsrud Puhl, AUSA, Fargo, ND, for Appellant.

Christopher J. Lancaster, AFPD, Fargo, ND, for Appellee.

Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Kenneth Lee Mahoney, Jr. pled guilty to transporting child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(1), and possessing child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(4)(B). Over the government’s objection, the district court did not require Mahoney to be taken into custody immediately and instead released him pending sentencing. The government appeals the district court’s detention deci*706sion, and after briefing from both sides, we reverse.

It is undisputed that Mahoney’s case is governed by 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a)(2), which requires him to be taken into custody immediately unless “it is clearly shown that there are exceptional reasons why [his] detention would not be appropriate,” 18 U.S.C. § 3145(c). The sole exceptional reason given by the district court was that Mahoney had “done remarkably well on release.”

Upon de novo review, *United States v. Cantu,*935 F.2d 950, 951 (8th Cir.1991), we conclude that this is not an exceptional reason. It is well settled that compliance with the terms of pretrial release is commendable but does not justify release under section 3145(c). *United States v. Little,*485 F.3d 1210, 1211 (8th Cir.2007); *United States v. Larue,*478 F.3d 924, 925 (8th Cir.2007); *United States v. Mostrom,*11 F.3d 93, 95 (8th Cir.1993). Although Mahoney makes much of the fact that his pretrial release allowed him to leave the district court’s jurisdiction and be supervised by probation from a different state, we fail to see how the specific conditions of Mahoney’s pretrial release distinguishes our case law.

Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the district court and remand the case with instructions that the district court order Mahoney taken into custody immediately. The mandate shall issue forthwith.
#### Stuart Barrett et al., Appellants, v Edward Scharf et al., Respondents.

[666 NYS2d 23]

—In an action for declaratory and injunctive relief, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Berler, J.), dated September 27, 1996, which denied their motion for a preliminary injunction.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The decision to grant a preliminary injunction is a matter ordinarily committed to the sound discretion of the court hearing the motion *(see, Doe v Axelrod,*73 NY2d 748, 750). To obtain a preliminary injunction the plaintiffs were required to demonstrate (1) a likelihood of ultimate success on the merits, (2) irreparable harm unless the injunction is granted, and (3) that the equities are balanced in their favor *(see, Aetna Ins. Co. v Capasso,*75 NY2d 860, 862; *Doe v Axelrod, supra,*at 750). Based on the record before us, it cannot be said that the Supreme Court’s decision to deny the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction was an improvident exercise of discretion. Mangano, P. J., Copertino, Krausman and McGinity, JJ., concur.