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

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3357 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 30, 2009 

Received 

AN ACT 

To restore sums to the Highway Trust Fund 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, 


erowe on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 3357 RDS 

1 SECTION 1. FUNDING OF THE HIGHWAY TRUST FUND. 

2 Subsection (f) of section 9503 of the Internal Rev3 enue Code of 1986 (relating to determination of trust fund 

4 balances after September 30, 1998) is amended— 

5 (1) by striking paragraph (2); and 

6 (2) by adding at the end the following new 

7 paragraph: 

8 ‘‘(2) INCREASE IN FUND BALANCE.—Out of 

9 money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, 

10 there is hereby appropriated (without fiscal year lim11 itation) to the Highway Trust Fund 

12 $7,000,000,000.’’. 

13 SEC. 2. ADVANCES TO THE UNEMPLOYMENT TRUST FUND 

14 AND OTHER FUNDS. 

15 The item relating to ‘‘Department of Labor—Em16 ployment and Training Administration—Advances to the 

17 Unemployment Trust Fund and Other Funds’’ in title I 

18 of division F of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 

19 (Public Law 111–8; 123 Stat. 754) is amended by striking 

20 ‘‘to remain available through September 30, 2010’’ and 

21 all that follows (before the heading for the following item) 

22 and inserting ‘‘such sums as may be necessary’’. 

23 SEC. 3. FHA MORTGAGE INSURANCE COMMITMENT AU24 THORITY. 

25 The item relating to ‘‘Federal Housing Administra26 tion—Mutual Mortgage Insurance Program Account’’ in 


erowe on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 3357 RDS 

1 title II of division I of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 

2 2009 (Public Law 111–8; 123 Stat. 966) is amended by 

3 striking ‘‘$315,000,000,000’’ and inserting 

4 ‘‘$400,000,000,000’’. 

5 SEC. 4. GNMA MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES GUAR6 ANTEE COMMITMENT AUTHORITY. 

7 The item relating to ‘‘Government National Mortgage 

8 Association—Guarantees of Mortgage-Backed Securities 

9 Loan Guarantee Program Account’’ in title II of division 

10 I of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 

11 111–8; 123 Stat. 967) is amended by striking 

12 ‘‘$300,000,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$400,000,000,000’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives July 29, 2009. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 


erowe on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
# EXHIBIT 32.1

# CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report
of CurrencySharesSM British Pound Sterling Trust (the Trust) on
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Carl G. Verboncoeur,
Chief Executive Officer of Rydex Specialized Products LLC, the Sponsor of the Trust,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 Trust.

Date: January 29, 2007

/s/ Carl G. VerboncoeurCarl G.
Verboncoeur*Chief Executive Officer(principal executive officer)

*The Registrant is a
trust and Carl G. Verboncoeur is signing in his capacity as the principal executive
officer of Rydex Specialized Products LLC, the Sponsor of the Registrant.
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-69,251-10

EX P ARTE TORY GRAY, Applicant
ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. W03-74017-H(H) IN THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 1

OF DALLAS COUNTY
Per curiam . O R D E R P u rs u ant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedur e, t h e cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of capital murder and sente nced to life imprisonment. In his prese nt applicati o n , A p p li cant raises two grounds. This application, howeve r, prese nts
a more serious question. This Court’s rec ords ref lect that Applicant has filed six prior applications perta ining to this conviction. It is obvious f rom the rec ord that Applicant continues to r aise issues that have been presented and rejected in previous applications or that s houl d h av e been presented2

in previous ap p l ications. The writ of habeas corpus is not to be li ghtly or easily abused. Sanders

v. U.S. , 373 U.S. 1 (1963); Ex parte Carr , 511 S.W .2d 523 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974). Be cause of his repe titive claims, we hold that Applicant’s claims are barr ed from revie w under Article 11.07, § 4, and ar e wa ived and a

bandoned by

his abuse of the writ. This application is dismiss ed. There fore , we instruct the Honora ble Abel Acosta, Clerk of the Court of Criminal Appea ls,
n o t to acc ept or file the instant application for a writ of habea s corpus, or any future appli ca t i o n perta ining to this conviction unless Applicant is able to show in such an application that any claims prese nted have not been raised previously and that they could not have been prese nted in a previous application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Bilton , 602 S.W .2d 534 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980). Copies of this order shall be sent to the Texas Depa rtment of Criminal J ustice-Corr ectional Institut ions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Filed: De cembe r 7, 2016 Do not publish
EX-10.2






NOTATION OF GUARANTEE




Each of the undersigned (collectively, the “Guarantors”) have unconditionally guaranteed,
jointly and severally (such guarantee by each Guarantor being referred to herein as the
“Guarantee”) (i) the due and punctual payment of the principal of and interest on the Securities
when they become due, whether at the Stated Maturity of the Notes, a Redemption Date, a Change in
Control Repurchase Date or an Optional Repurchase Date, by acceleration or otherwise, the due and
punctual payment of interest on the overdue principal and interest, if any, on the Notes, to the
extent lawful, and the due and punctual performance and observance of all other obligations of the
Issuer to the holders or the Trustee all in accordance with the terms set forth in Article 14 of
the Indenture, dated as of April 18, 2007, among RAIT Financial Trust, each of the Guarantors and
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as trustee, and (ii) in case of any extension of time of payment or renewal
of any Notes or any of such other obligations, that the same will be promptly paid in full when due
or performed in accordance with the terms of the extension or renewal, whether at stated maturity,
by acceleration or otherwise.



No past, present or future shareholder, officer, trustee, director, employee or incorporator,
as such, of any of the Guarantors shall have any liability under the Guarantee by reason of such
person’s status as shareholder, officer, trustee, director, employee or incorporator. Each holder
of a Note by accepting a Note waives and releases all such liability. This waiver and release are
part of the consideration for the issuance of the Guarantees.



Each holder of a Note by accepting such Note agrees that any Guarantor named below shall have
no further liability with respect to its Guarantee if such Guarantor otherwise ceases to be liable
in respect of its Guarantee in accordance with the terms of the Indenture.



The Guarantee shall not be valid or obligatory for any purpose until the certificate of
authentication on the Notes upon which the Guarantee is noted shall have been executed by the
Trustee under the Indenture by the manual signature of one of its authorized signatories.



Capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the meanings given to them in the
Indenture.



[SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS]






1







RAIT PARTNERSHIP L.P., a Delaware limited partnership




	 	 	 	By:
RAIT General, Inc., a Maryland corporation, its
general partner






By: /s/ Jack E. Salmon

Name: Jack E. Salmon

Title: Chief Financial Officer





RAIT ASSET HOLDINGS, LLC, a Delaware limited




liability company




	 	 	 	By:
RAIT Partnership, L.P., a Delaware limited
partnership, its sole member






	 	 	 	By:
RAIT General, Inc., a Maryland corporation, its
general partner






By: /s/ Jack E. Salmon

Name: Jack E. Salmon

Title: Chief Financial Officer





2
4001
      Leadenhall Road


Mt.
      Laurel, NJ 08054






March
        7,
        2007
 
 AURORA
        LOAN SERVICES LLC
 Annual
        Reporting PHH Mortgage (formerly Cendant Mortgage)
 10350
        Park Meadows Drive
 Mailstop
        3199
 Littleton,
        CO 80124
 
 Re:
        Servicer Compliance Statement
 
 Deal
        Name: LMT 2006-02
 
 Dear
        Sir
        and/or Madame:
  This
        statement of compliance is being provided in accordance with Item 1123 of
        Regulation AB. The Undersigned hereby states that:
 
 1.
            I
                am an authorized officer of PHH Mortgage Corporation (the
                “Servicer”); 
 2.
            A
                review of the Servicer’s activities during the period from 03/01/2006 (the
                “Reporting Period”) and its performance under the Agreement has been made
                under my supervision; and 
 3.
            To
                the best of my knowledge, based on such review, except as described
                in
                section 3(a) hereto, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations
                under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting
                Period. 
 a.
            The
                Servicer did not maintain or provide one of the required monthly
                reports,
                specifically the S5L2 Fidelity report, as stated in the transaction
                agreement(s) for the Reporting period shown in section 2 of this
                statement. 
  By: 
        /s/ Deborah A. Rocchi
 Name:
        Deborah A. Rocchi
 Title:
        Assistant Vice President





4001
        Leadenhall Road
 Mt.
        Laurel, NJ 08054
 March
            7,
            2007
 
 AURORA
            LOAN SERVICES LLC
 Annual
            Reporting PHH Mortgage (formerly Cendant Mortgage)
 10350
            Park Meadows Drive
 Mailstop
            3199
 Littleton,
            CO 80124
 
 Deal
            Name: LMT 2006-02
 
 Dear
            Sir
            and/or Madame:
  Enclosed,
              please find a Supplemental Statement to the Annual Statement as to Compliance
              (1123 Statement). This Supplemental Statement is issued pursuant to
              the Annual
              Statement as to Compliance (1123 Statement) dated February 28,
              2007.
  We
              are
              providing this supplement to further specify the material instance
              of
              noncompliance referred to in paragraph (a) of the Annual Statement
              of
              Compliance.
  /s/
                Deborah A. Rocchi
 Deborah
                A. Rocchi
 Assistant
                Vice President
 Date: 
                March 7, 2007
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kenneth Dale GOOCH, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-35252.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted March 8, 2011.

Filed March 10, 2011.

Timothy John Ohms, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USSP-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Spokane, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Jeffrey Scott Niesen, Esquire, Trial, Law Office of Jeffrey S. Niesen, Spokane, WA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: McKEOWN, FISHER, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM *

Defendant-Appellant Kenneth Gooch appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 on the ground that his counsel provided him with ineffective assistance. We affirm.

There are two elements that a defendant must satisfy to establish a Sixth Amendment right to counsel violation on the theory that counsel’s representation was constitutionally ineffective: First, it is necessary to show that counsel’s performance was deficient and, second, the defendant must show that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense. *See Earp v. Ornoski,*431 F.3d 1158, 1173 (9th Cir.2005) (citing *Strickland v. Washington,*466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984)). There is a “strong presumption that counsel’s conduct falls within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance.” *Strickland,*466 U.S. *701at 689, 104 S.Ct. 2052. Gooch has not shown that his counsel’s performance was deficient.1

Gooch contends that his counsel should have made further efforts to locate and interview two potential witnesses, Elizabeth Troudt and Amanda Card. But “[a] claim of failure to interview a witness ... cannot establish ineffective assistance when the person’s account is otherwise fairly known to defense counsel.” *Bragg v. Galaza,*242 F.3d 1082, 1088 (9th Cir.2001) (citing *Eggleston v. United States,*798 F.2d 374, 376 (9th Cir.1986)). Defense counsel knew Troudt’s account because he reviewed the transcript of her grand jury testimony and reports of her interviews with law enforcement. Gooch does not identify additional information his counsel would have obtained by interviewing Troudt, except to claim that her testimony would have been useful to impeach a key prosecution witness. But Troudt’s testimony would also have implicated Gooch by connecting him to the Beretta. The strategy of not pursuing Troudt further as a witness2 falls within the “wide latitude” accorded counsel for tactical decisions. *Strickland,*466 U.S. at 689, 104 S.Ct. 2052.

Nor does Gooch explain what relevant information would have been gained by interviewing Card. Her testimony might have been used to impeach Troudt, but because Troudt didn’t testify, what Card might have said would not have affected the jury’s decision.

AFFIRMED.

*

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

1

. Because we hold that counsel’s performance was not deficient, we need not assess whether counsel's performance prejudiced the defense.

2

. Defense counsel did hire an investigator to find Troudt, but that effort was not successful.
IIB 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3476 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 14, 2009 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources 

AN ACT 

To reauthorize the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation 

Area Citizen Advisory Commission. 

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


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 3476 RFS

1 SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION OF DELAWARE WATER GAP 

2 NATIONAL RECREATION AREA CITIZEN ADVI3 SORY COMMISSION. 

4 (a) REAUTHORIZATION.—Section 5 of Public Law 

5 100–573 (16 U.S.C. 460o note) is amended by striking 

6 ‘‘20’’ and inserting ‘‘30’’. 

7 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This section shall be deemed 

8 to have taken effect on October 30, 2008. 

Passed the House of Representatives October 13, 

2009. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
#### John K. MOORE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. George T. HAGAN, Warden; Henry McMaster, South Carolina Attorney General, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 07-7586.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 2, 2008.

Decided: May 12, 2008.

John K. Moore, Appellant Pro Se. Samuel Creighton Waters, Office of the Attorney General of South Carolina, for Appel-lees.

Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

John K. Moore seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. *29328 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. *Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Moore has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and 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.*
Silver State Bank Amendment to 1997 Executive Stock Option Plan



 Exhibit 10.3 
 SILVER STATE BANK 
 AMENDMENT TO 1997 EXECUTIVE STOCK OPTION PLAN 
 This Amendment to the Silver State Bank 1997 Executive Stock Option Plan is made and effective
this 29th day of July, 1998, as follows: 
 WHEREAS, on or about October 23, 1997, the Board of Directors of Silver State Bank (“Bank”) approved, ratified and adopted that certain
Silver State Bank 1997 Executive Stock Option Plan (the “Plan”), a true and correct copy of said Plan is attached hereto as Exhibit “A;” 
 WHEREAS, section 8 of the Plan provides that “[t]he exercise price for Options granted under this Plan will be $.10 per share;” 
 WHEREAS, section 10 of the Plan provides, inter alia, that “[o]ptions to the participants shall vest in accordance with the following schedule of years of employment or service as a director following the
date of grant of such Options: 
  

			
	 Vesting of Options
	  	 Years Following Date of Grant

	 25%
	  	6 years
	 50%
	  	7 years
	 75%
	  	8 years
	 100%
	  	9 years

 WHEREAS, on or about July 29, 1998, the Board of Directors of Silver State Bank directed that
the Plan and each Agreement entered into pursuant to the Plan be amended such that the Exercise Price referenced in the 1997 Executive Stock Option Plan shall be amended to reflect one-hundred percent (100%) of the fair market value of the
price per share of the Bank’s common stock at time of issuance of the grant of said Option, which amendment shall apply retroactively as to the effective date of the Plan; 
 WHEREAS, on or about July 29, 1998, the Board of Directors of Silver State Bank directed that the Plan and each Agreement entered into pursuant to
the Plan be amended such that each grantee’s interest vests fully on the date five years from the date of the Grant of such Options; 
 NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows: 
 1. Paragraph 8 “Exercise Price” is amended in its
entirety to read as follows: 
  

	 	8.	Exercise Price 

 The Exercise
Price for Options granted under this Plan shall be at least 100% of the fair market value of a Share on the date the Option is granted. 
 2.
Paragraph 9 “Term of Options” is amended to read as follows: The Board will determine the Term for all Options granted under the Plan. In no event shall the Term of an Option extend beyond ten years from the date of Grant.








 3. Paragraph 10 “Vesting” is amended by deleting the table illustrating the
vesting schedule and replacing said table with the following information: 
  

			
	 Vesting of Options
	  	 Years Following Date of Grant

	 25%
	  	1 year
	 50%
	  	2 years
	 75%
	  	3 years
	 100%
	  	4 years

 IN WITNESS HEREOF, the Bank, through its undersigned authorized officer, hereby adopts this
Amendment as of the date written above. 
  

	
	
	 /s/ Corey L. Johnson

	 Corey L. Johnson, President
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO  18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of LaBranche & Co Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30,
2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Harvey S. Traison, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and to the best of my knowledge, 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 results of operations of the Company at the end of, and
for, the period covered by the Report.

|                     |  |                      |  |                                                  
|-------------------- |  | -------------------- |  | -------------------------------------------------
|Date: August 9, 2004 |  | /s/HARVEY S. TRAISON
|                     |  | Name:                |  | Harvey S. Traison                                
|                     |  | Title:               |  | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and is not being filed as part of the
Report or as a separate disclosure document. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to LaBranche & Co Inc. and will be retained by
LaBranche & Co Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---



QuickLinks
---

Exhibit 8

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report of Augusta Resource
Corporation (the Company) on Form 40-F for the period ended December 31, 2010
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Gil Clausen, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

|March 29, 2011 | /s/ Gil Clausen        
|-------------- | -----------------------
|               |                        
|               | Gil Clausen            
|               | Chief Executive Officer

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

---