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

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3284 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3284

   To prohibit the heads of executive agencies from entering into or 
    renewing procurement contracts with persons that export certain 
  computer or telecommunications technologies to Iran, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 21, 2009

    Mr. Sherman (for himself, Mr. Royce, and Mr. Klein of Florida) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                    Oversight and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To prohibit the heads of executive agencies from entering into or 
    renewing procurement contracts with persons that export certain 
  computer or telecommunications technologies to Iran, 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. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Reduce Iranian Cyber-Suppression 
Act''.

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

    In this Act:
            (1) Executive agency.--The term ``executive agency'' has 
        the meaning given that term in section 4 of the Office of 
        Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 403).
            (2) Sensitive technology.--The term ``sensitive 
        technology'' means hardware, software, telecommunications 
        equipment, or any other technology that the President 
        determines may be used by the Government of Iran--
                    (A) to restrict the free flow of unbiased 
                information in Iran; or
                    (B) to disrupt, monitor, or otherwise restrict 
                speech by the people of Iran.

SEC. 3. PROHIBITION ON PROCUREMENT CONTRACTS WITH PERSONS THAT EXPORT 
              SENSITIVE TECHNOLOGY TO IRAN.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
head of an executive agency may not enter into or renew a contract for 
the procurement of goods or services with a person that exports 
sensitive technology to Iran.
    (b) Waiver.--The President may waive the application of the 
prohibition under subsection (a) if the President--
            (1) determines that such a waiver is in the national 
        interest of the United States; and
            (2) submits to Congress a report describing the reasons for 
        the determination.
                                 <all>
```
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED July 13, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-40568 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JOSE VICTOR RUFINO-CERVANTES, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:04-CR-2308

-------------------- Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Jose Victor Rufino-Cervantes raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is 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


         The undersigned executive officers of PVF Capital Corp. (the
"Registrant") hereby certify that this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year
ended June 30, 2009 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.



                                By: /s/ Robert J. King, Jr.
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    Name:  Robert J. King, Jr.
                                    Title: President and Chief Executive Officer



                                By: /s/ Edward B. Debevec
                                    ----------------------------------
                                    Name:  Edward B. Debevec
                                    Title: Treasurer

Date: October 27, 2009
Order entered October 28, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-01468-CV

IN RE BABU SAMUEL KALLUVILAYIL, Relator

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 1

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F-91-00956-TH

ORDER

The Court has before it relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. The Court requests that 

respondent and real party in interest file any responses by November 7, 2013.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS 

JUSTICE
exhibit102_122314






Exhibit 10.2




CLECO CORPORATION
2014 RECOVERY AGREEMENT
PAY FOR PERFORMANCE PLAN 


In consideration and as a condition of the 2014 payment of a portion of your award under the Cleco Corporation (the “Company”) Pay For Performance Plan (the “PFP Plan”) for the Company’s fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 (the “PFP Award”):


a.    If the level of attainment of the Company Goals applicable to the determination of the PFP Award, as determined in 2015 on the basis of the actual financial statements for the Company’s 2014 fiscal year, is less than the level of attainment used to determine the amount of the 2014 payment with respect to the PFP Award (resulting in an “Excess Payment”), the Company shall take such action as it deems necessary or appropriate to recover the Excess Payment, which may include, but shall not be limited to: (i) an offset of amounts otherwise payable to the Undersigned, whether under the PFP Plan, in the form of base compensation or otherwise; or (ii) a return by the Undersigned of the principal amount of the Excess Payment, promptly upon notice by the Company.


b.    In the event the Company reasonably determines that an Excess Payment has been made, the Company shall notify the Undersigned, including notification of the amount of the Excess Payment, the basis for the Company’s determination of the excess, and the manner in which the Excess Payment shall be recovered (the “Excess Notice”).  If the Undersigned disputes the determination of the Excess Payment, he/she shall notify the Company, in writing, no later than two business days following receipt of the Excess Notice.  If the Undersigned fails to so notify the Company, upon the lapse of such two-day period, the Company’s determination shall be deemed final and binding, and the Undersigned shall be deemed to have agreed to the recovery of the Excess Payment as provided herein. 


c.    The Undersigned further agrees to execute and promptly deliver to the Company such additional documents as the Company may reasonably require to recover any Excess Payment hereunder. 


Acknowledged and agreed this ____ day of December, 2014:
                
                                                    


Print Name:
#### ATLANTIC RESEARCH MARKETING SYSTEMS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Stephen P. TROY, Jr. and Troy Industries, Inc., Defendants-Cross Appellants.

Nos. 2011-1002, 2011-1003.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

May 16, 2011.

Paul J. Hayes, Dean G. Bostock, Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky, Boston, MA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Damian R. Laplaca, Donovan Hatem LLP, Boston, MA, for Defendants-Cross Appellants.

Before GAJARSA, Circuit Judge.

ON MOTION

ORDER

Stephen P. Troy, Jr. and Troy Industries, Inc. (Troy) move to stay the briefing schedule in these appeals pending the disposition of Troy’s motion to compel, filed in this case at the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Atlantic Research Marketing Systems, Inc. (Atlantic) opposes.

Upon consideration thereof,

It Is Ordered That:

The motion to stay is denied.
CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Report of CoConnect, Inc., a Nevada corporation, (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
Mark L. Baum, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify the
following pursuant to Section 18, U.S.C. 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 results of operations of the
      Company.








/s/ Mark L.
Baum


Mark L.
Baum


Interim
President and Chief Executive Officer





April 22,
2009
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporation byreference in Registration Statement (No. 333-134152) on Form S-8, Registration Statement (No. 333-145587) on Form S-3, and Registration Statement (No. 333-148138) on Form S-3 of Basin Water Inc. of our reports dated March 17, 2008 (updatedFebruary 10, 2009) and February 10, 2009 relating to our audits of the consolidated financial statements, and the financial statement schedule and internal control over financial reporting, respectively, which appear in this Annual Report on Form10-K of Basin Water, Inc for the year ended December 31, 2007. 

Our report dated February 10, 2009, on the effectiveness of internalcontrol over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007, expressed an opinion that Basin Water, Inc. had not maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007, based on criteria established in InternalControl—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). 

/s/ SingerLewak LLP

Irvine, California 

February 10, 2009
### JUDGMENT 

## Court of Appeals First District of Texas

NO. 01

- 13

- 00 615

- CV DONNA T. MOORE, DAVI D B. MOORE, AND PROV IDENT FUNDING ASSOCIATES, LP D/B/A PROVIDENT HOME LOANS , Appellant s V. BRENHAM READY MIX, I NC. , Appellee Appeal from the 155 th District Court of Waller County. (Tr. Ct. No. 09

- 12

- 20105 ).
This case is an appeal from the final judgment signed by the trial court on May 2 , 2013. After submitting the case on the appellate record and the arguments properly raised by the parties, the Court holds that the re was reversible error in trial court’s judgment

. Accordingly, the Court reverses the trial court’s judgment awarding Brenham Ready Mix., Inc. foreclosure of the f ull amount of both of its liens and attorney’s fees , renders judgment that Brenham Ready Mix, Inc.’s concrete lien is invalid, and remands the case to the trial court to determine the dollar amount of the fill

- dirt lien that can be enforced against each of the appellants’ properties

.
The Court orders that the appellants , Donna T. Moore, David B. Moore, and Provident Funding Associates, LP d/b/a Provident Home Loans, jointly and severally, payone half of the appellate costs. The Court orders that the appe llee, Brenham Ready Mix,

Inc., pay one half of the appellate costs.

The Court orders that this decision be certified below for observance.
Judgment rendered March 10 , 201 5

. Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Jennings and Keyes. Opinion d elivered by Justice Keyes.
Offer Letter, dated 02/15/1996, between Yongsam Lee and the Registrant



 Exhibit 10.7 
 February 15, 1996 
 Mr. Yongsam Lee 
 Dear Yongsam: 
 We are pleased to offer you the position of Network Administrator at a starting salary of $70,000 per year. We shall expect you to start no later than March 1,
1996. Because of the nature of your position, you will occasionally be expected to work during non-standard business hours. 
 In order for you to meet
commitments to your previous employer, UCI, you will be allowed to take unpaid personal time off in half or one day increments for a total time off that is not to exceed two weeks. This time off must be taken during the period from March 1,
1996 to July 1, 1996. Any future time off will be subject to the normal company policy. 
 As a member of the Team, you will be eligible to receive
options under the Company’s Stock Option Plan as may be determined by the sole discretion of the Board of Directors. Mr. Joe Kiani, President and CEO, shall recommend to the Board to issue you an option to purchase 5,000 shares of Common
Stock, vesting over 5 years and exercisable at fair market value, as determined by the Board of Directors, at the time the option is granted. 
 This is an
exempt position. You will receive group medical and dental care at the Company’s expense in accordance with our group medical plan, with dependent coverage available at your expense. This coverage should begin on the first day of your
employment. You will be accorded all of the benefits set forth in our Employee Handbook and you will agree to abide by the policies and procedures set forth in our Employee Handbook. The policies and procedures of the Employee Handbook may be
amended from time to time at the direction of the Board of Directors. 
 You must sign a copy of the Company’s non-disclosure and confidentiality
agreement which will remain in effect during and after your employment. You will also need to provide proof of your identity and authorization to work in the United States as required by the immigration laws, in addition to the customary tax forms.
Masimo is an at-will employer, and your employment may be terminated at any time by you or Masimo. Your employment may be terminated at any time with or without cause or advance notice. 







 This letter sets forth all the terms of our offer, and it supersedes all prior agreements and discussions. These terms
cannot be modified or amended by any supervisor or by any action of the Company except a written agreement signed by the President. 
 To confirm that you
agree to these terms, please sign and date the enclosed copy of this letter and return it to me before commencing employment. We welcome you as part of the Team and look forward to a mutually satisfactory relationship. 
  

					
	 Sincerely,
	 		 	
			
	 /s/ Rex J. McCarthy
	 		 	 
	 Rex J. McCarthy
	 		 	
	 Director of Software Development
	 		 	
			
	 I agree to the terms stated in this letter.
	 		 	
			
	 /s/ Yongsam Lee
	 		 	 Dated: 02/15/96

	 Yongsam Lee
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED March 16, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-41622 Summary Calendar

JAMES GREGORY LYNN, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus TRACEY P. ALLEN, Case Manager III; JODY HATCH, Captain; MICHAEL DABNEY, Captain; LEN FOXWORTH, Substitute Counselor; CLARENCE MOSLEY, Assistant Warden, Defendants-Appellees.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:03-CV-538

-------------------- Before JOLLY, WIENER, and PICKERING, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * James Gregory Lynn, Texas prisoner # 636695, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his civil rights action as frivolous and for failure to state a claim. He moves for this court to grant him a restraining order; this motion is DENIED.
See Greene v. Fair , 314 F.2d 200, 201 (5th Cir. 1963). Lynn asserts that he was denied due process when he was placed in administrative segregation prior to a hearing on aNo. 03-41622 -2- disciplinary charge for possession of a weapon and during the hearing itself. Because Lynn has no interest in his custodial classification, his prehearing detention does not violation due
process. Harper v. Showers , 174 F.3d 716, 719 (5th Cir. 1999); Whitley v. Hunt , 158 F.3d 882, 889 (5th Cir. 1998). Lynn also asserts that he was denied due process at his disciplinary hearing and that there was no evidence to support his disciplinary conviction. He is not entitled to relief on these grounds because he has not established that his disciplinary conviction has been overturned or vacated. Edwards v. Balisok , 520 U.S. 641, 648-49 (1997). Lynn’s appeal is without arguable merit and is thus frivolous. See Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, we DISMISS Lynn’s appeal as frivolous. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2. This dismissal of his appeal as frivolous and the district court’s dismissal of his complaint as frivolous and for failure to state a claim constitute two “strikes” for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons , 103 F.3d 383, 388 (5th Cir. 1996). If Lynn obtains three “strikes,” he will not be able to proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
APPEAL DISMISSED.
#### Dana December SMITH, Petitioner-Appellant, v. David BALLARD, Warden, Mt. Olive Correctional Complex, Respondent-Appellee, George Castelle, Interested Party-Party in Interest.

No. 10-7464.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 4, 2011.

Decided: April 8, 2011.

Dana December Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Robert David Goldberg, Assistant Attorney General, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Dana December Smith seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. *See*28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). 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) (2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Smith has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We deny Smith’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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.*
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, David L. Levine, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of eLandia International Inc. on Form 10-K for the annual period ended
December 31, 2007, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of Elandia, Inc.



|                   |  |  |  |     |  |                            
|------------------ |  |  |  | --- |  | ---------------------------
|Date: May 16, 2008 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ David L. Levine        
|                   |  |  |  |     |  | David L. Levine            
|                   |  |  |  |     |  | Principal Executive Officer
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 accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K (the
"Report") of AMCON Distributing Company (the "Company") for the fiscal year
ended September 30, 2006, I, Andrew C. Plummer, Vice President and Acting
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, to 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.


Date: December 28, 2006          /s/ Andrew C. Plummer
                              -------------------------
                              Title: Vice President and
                              Acting Chief Financial Officer



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to AMCON Distributing Company and will be retained by AMCON
Distributing Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 32.1   CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL 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 of CoConnect, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2006, Robert Thele and Dean H. Becker hereby 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 their knowledge:  a. the quarterly report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  b. the information contained in the quarterly report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.    /s/ Robert Thele Robert Thele, Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)    /s/ Dean H. Becker Dean H. Becker, Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)  August 21, 2006