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

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 341 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to suspend the running of 

periods of limitation for credit or refund of overpayment of Federal 

income tax by veterans while their service-connected compensation determinations are pending with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 8, 2009 

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

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to suspend 

the running of periods of limitation for credit or refund 

of overpayment of Federal income tax by veterans while 

their service-connected compensation determinations are 

pending with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. 

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

3 SECTION 1. RUNNING OF PERIODS OF LIMITATION SUS4 PENDED PENDING SERVICE-CONNECTED 

5 COMPENSATION DETERMINATIONS. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 6511 of the Internal Rev7 enue Code of 1986 (relating to limitation on credit or reVerDate Nov 24 2008 22:54 Jan 11, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H341.IH H341

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•HR 341 IH

1 fund) is amended by redesignating subsection (i) as sub2 section (j) and by inserting after subsection (h) the fol3 lowing new subsection: 

4 ‘‘(i) RUNNING OF PERIODS OF LIMITATION SUS5 PENDED PENDING SERVICE-CONNECTED COMPENSATION

6 DETERMINATIONS.—If the claim for credit or refund of 

7 any tax imposed by subtitle A relates to an overpayment 

8 attributable to the determination by the Secretary of Vet9 erans Affairs that an individual is entitled to compensa10 tion under chapter 11 of title 38, United States Code, the 

11 running of the periods specified in subsections (a), (b), 

12 and (c) with respect to the individual shall be suspended 

13 during the period beginning on the date the individual 

14 submits a claim for such compensation and ending on the 

15 date of the determination by the Secretary of Veterans 

16 Affairs.’’. 

17 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.— 

18 (1) IN GENERAL.—The amendments made by 

19 this section shall apply with respect to submissions 

20 of claims for compensation under chapter 11 of title 

21 38, United States Code, after December 31, 1995. 

22 (2) WAIVER OF LIMITATIONS.— 

23 (A) IN GENERAL.—If the credit or refund 

24 of any overpayment of tax resulting from a de25 termination described in subparagraph (B) is 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
3 

•HR 341 IH

1 prevented at any time by the operation of any 

2 law or rule of law (including res judicata), such 

3 credit or refund may nevertheless be allowed or 

4 made if the claim therefor is filed before the 

5 close of the 1-year period beginning on the date 

6 of the enactment of this Act. 

7 (B) DETERMINATION DESCRIBED.—A de8 termination is described in this subparagraph if 

9 the determination is made by the Secretary of 

10 Veterans Affairs under chapter 11 of title 38, 

11 United States Code, after December 31, 1995. 

Æ 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Sirron R. PRIMERS, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 08-1846.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: April 22, 2008.

Filed: May 7, 2008.

Laine T. Cardarella, Asst. Fed. Public Defender, Kansas City, MO, for appellant.

Lajuana M. Counts, Asst. U.S. Atty., Kansas City, MO, for appellee.

Before WOLLMAN, HANSEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Sirron Primers appeals from the district court’s1 denial of his motion for a reduction of his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), based on Amendment 706 to the United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual (U.S.S.G.), which reduced certain base offense levels in U.S.S.G. § 2Dl.l(c) depending on the quantity of cocaine base (crack) involved.

Primers pled guilty to conspiring to possess with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of crack. He was subject to a 10 year statutory mandatory minimum sentence, but the district court granted the government’s motion for a downward departure based on Primers’ substantial assistance and sentenced him to 84 months imprisonment. Judgment was entered on June 26, 2003. In January 2008 Primers filed a motion to reduce his sentence, citing Amendment 706, and for appointment of counsel. The district court appointed counsel and then denied the motion to reduce sentence. Primers appeals.

Primers’ guideline range was not based on the amount of drugs under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1, but on his status as a career offender under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1. Accordingly, his original sentence is unaffected by the guideline amendments, *see*U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(a)(2)(B); *United States v. Tingle,*524 F.3d 839 (8th Cir.2008) (per curiam), and we affirm the order of the district court.

1

. The Honorable Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr., Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Michael BENOIT, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 06-56457.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 22, 2008.*

Filed May 1, 2008.

Robert W. Metzler, Esq., John Schumann Fax, U.S. Department of Justice, Tax Division/Appellate Section, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Michael Benoit, Santee, CA, pro se.

Before: GRABER, FISHER, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Michael Benoit appeals pro se from the district court’s order granting the petition of the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) to enforce summonses and denying Benoit’s motion for recusal. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

The district court properly concluded that it had subject matter jurisdiction over the action pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7604(a), and personal jurisdiction over Benoit, who was personally served with the petition and summonses. *See Burnham v. Superior Court,*495 U.S. 604, 610-12, 110 S.Ct. 2105, 109 L.Ed.2d 631 (1990) (holding that personal seivice in a state is sufficient for establishing personal jurisdiction).

The district court did not commit clear error by enforcing the summonses because the proof of service indicates that Benoit was personally served with the summons in accordance with 26 U.S.C. § 7603. Further, the IRS has the authority to investigate Benoit’s tax liability under 26 U.S.C. § 7602(a).

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Benoit’s motion for recusal challenging the judge’s prior rulings. *See United States v. Studley,*783 F.2d 934, 939 (9th Cir.1986) (explaining that “a judge’s prior adverse ruling is not sufficient for recusal”).

The district court properly determined that Benoit could not assert a blanket Fifth Amendment privilege to avoid appearing at an administrative proceeding. *See United States v. Drollinger,*80 F.3d 389, 392 (9th Cir.1996) (per curiam) (stating that a taxpayer confronted with a summons to appear for examination and produce documents must “present himself for *640questioning, and as to each question elect to raise or not raise the [Fifth Amendment] defense” (citation omitted)).

The district court did not violate Benoit’s due process rights because Benoit was afforded notice and a meaningful opportunity to respond to the petition. *See Rio Prop., Inc., v. Rio Int’l Interlink,*284 F.3d 1007, 1016-17 (9th Cir.2002) (stating that due process requires “notice reasonably calculated, under all the circumstances, to apprise interested parties of the pendency of the action and afford them an opportunity to present their objections” (citation omitted)).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
# EXHIBIT 32.1

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

In connection with the Annual Report
of CurrencySharesSM Mexican Peso Trust (the Trust) on Form 10-K for
the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007 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 25, 2008

/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.
----

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, 2006  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. 

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.

----
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Robert Huyot, Deceased. Bonnie Huyot-Renoir, Appellant; Marilese Flusser et al., Respondents.

[666 NYS2d 697]

—In a proceeding, *inter alia,*to assert a right of election pursuant to EPTL 5-1.1-A, the petitioner appeals from a decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Queens County (Braatz, S.), dated June 7, 1996, which, *inter alia,*dismissed so much of the petition as was to elect against the will of Robert Huyot.

Ordered that the decree is affirmed, with costs payable by the appellant to the respondents Marilese Flusser, Suzanne Matthau, and Nicole Stevenson.

The Surrogate properly concluded that there is a distinction between “marriage” and “concubinage” under French law that is “more than mere language”. While the petitioner may enjoy *514some rights under French law as a result of her past relationship with the decedent, and while some of these rights may be similar or the same as those of married persons in France, these rights do not give the parties the status of husband and wife or make the parties the equivalent of husband and wife *(see, Matter of Jenkins,*133 Misc 2d 420). The parties were not married under French law and were not each other’s spouse. Thus, the petitioner cannot now be deemed a surviving spouse for the purpose of asserting a right of election under New York law *(see,*EPTL 5-1.1-A). Accordingly, the Surrogate’s Court properly dismissed so much of the petition as was to elect against the decedent’s will. Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Krausman and Luciano, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.1

Corcept Therapeutics Incorporated

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 Corcept Therapeutics Incorporated (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31,
2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Joseph K. Belanoff, M.D., Chief Executive Officer 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:



| | (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/ Joseph K. Belanoff  
|Joseph K. Belanoff, M.D.
|Chief Executive Officer 
|May 9, 2011
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 208 (Monday, October 30, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 50151]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-23528]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Health Resources and Services Administration


Advisory Committee on Infant Mortality; Notice of Charter Renewal

SUMMARY:  The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is hereby 
giving notice that the Advisory Committee on Infant Mortality (ACIM) 
has been rechartered. The effective date of the renewed ACIM charter is 
September 30, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  David S. de la Cruz, Ph.D., M.P.H., 
CAPTAIN, United States Public Health Service, Designated Federal 
Officer, ACIM, Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), 
HHS, Room 18N25, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857. Phone: (301) 
443-0543; <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d793b6a1beb3f9b3b2bbb694a5a2ad97bfa5a4b6f9b0b8a1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a6e2c7d0cfc288c2c3cac7e5d4d3dce6ced4d5c788c1c9d0">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  ACIM was established under provisions of 42 
U.S.C. 217a, section 222 of the Public Health Service Act, as amended. 
The Committee is governed by provisions of Public Law 92-463, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), which sets forth standards for the formation 
and use of Advisory Committees. ACIM advises the Secretary on 
Department activities and programs that are directed at reducing infant 
mortality and improving the health status of pregnant women and 
infants. The Committee represents a public and private partnership at 
the highest level to provide guidance and focus attention on the 
policies and resources required to address the reduction of infant 
mortality. The Committee also provides advice on how best to coordinate 
the myriad of federal, state, local, and private programs and efforts 
that are designed to deal with the health and social problems impacting 
infant mortality, including the Healthy Start program.
    On September 30, 2017, the ACIM charter was renewed. Renewal of the 
ACIM charter authorizes the Committee to operate until September 30, 
2019. A copy of the ACIM charter is available on the Committee's Web 
site: http://www.hrsa.gov/advisorycommittees/mchbadvisory/InfantMortality/Index.html. A copy of the charter can also be obtained 
by accessing the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) database that is 
maintained by the Committee Management Secretariat under the General 
Services Administration. The Web site address for the FACA database is 
http://www.facadatabase.gov/.

Amy McNulty,
Acting Director, Division of the Executive Secretariat.
[FR Doc. 2017-23528 Filed 10-27-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4165-15-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
* 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 CIR.

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 a
No. 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

5TH CIR. 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.
Exhibit 31.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                       18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED
                         PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Michael Magno certify that:

         1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of TrimFast
Group, 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
quarterly report;

         3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
aspects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the period presented in this quarterly report.

         4. Both myself and the chief financial officer are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

                  a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure
that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

                  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

                  c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about
the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

         5. Based on our most recent evaluation:

                  a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of
internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

                  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves
management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's
internal controls; and

         6. We have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were
significant changes in internal controls and in other factors that could
significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent
evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant
deficiencies and material weaknesses.


Date: March 12, 2004


/s/ Michael Magno
 ------------------------------------
Michael Magno, president, chief executive officer
TrimFast Group, Inc.