alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 290 

AN ACT 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to render an individual, who transfers certain educational assistance, to 

which the individual is entitled because of an agreement 

by such individual to serve in the Armed Forces, to 

a dependent of that individual, and who fails to complete 

such agreement, solely liable for the overpayment of such 

educational assistance. 
2 

•HR 290 EH

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

3 SECTION 1. SOLE LIABILITY FOR TRANSFERRED EDU4 CATIONAL ASSISTANCE BY AN INDIVIDUAL 

5 WHO FAILS TO COMPLETE A SERVICE AGREE6 MENT. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (i) of section 3319 of 

8 title 38, United States Code, is amended— 

9 (1) in paragraph (1)— 

10 (A) by striking ‘‘In the event’’ and insert11 ing ‘‘Subject to paragraph (2), in the event’’; 

12 and 

13 (B) by inserting ‘‘of this title’’ after ‘‘sec14 tion 3685’’; 

15 (2) in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (2)— 

16 (A) in the heading, by striking ‘‘IN GEN17 ERAL’’ and inserting ‘‘SOLE LIABILITY’’; and 

18 (B) by inserting ‘‘for which the individual 

19 shall be solely liable to the United States for 

20 the amount of the overpayment for purposes of 

21 section 3685 of this title’’ before the period at 

22 the end; and 

23 (3) in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (2)— 

24 (A) in the matter preceding clause (i), by 

25 striking ‘‘Subparagraph (A) shall not apply’’ 
3 

•HR 290 EH

1 and inserting ‘‘Neither the individual nor the 

2 dependent shall be liable to the United States 

3 for the amount of the overpayment for purposes 

4 of section 3685 of this title’’; and 

5 (B) in clause (ii), by inserting ‘‘of this 

6 title’’ after ‘‘section 3311(c)(4)’’. 

7 (b) REVERSION.—Effective October 1, 2024, such 

8 subsection (i) is amended to read as it read on the day 

9 before the date of the enactment of this Act. 

10 SEC. 2. DETERMINATION OF BUDGETARY EFFECTS. 

11 The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of 

12 complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, 

13 shall be determined by reference to the latest statement 

14 titled ‘‘Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation’’ for this 

15 Act, submitted for printing in the Congressional Record 

16 by the Chairman of the House Budget Committee, pro17 vided that such statement has been submitted prior to the 

18 vote on passage. 

Passed the House of Representatives June 15, 2021. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 
117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 290 

AN ACT 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to render 

educational assistance. ment, solely liable for the overpayment of such vidual, and who fails to complete such agreein the Armed Forces, to a dependent of that indicause of an agreement by such individual to serve assistance, to which the individual is entitled bean individual, who transfers certain educational
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND THE CONSOLIDATED
STATMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                          70,600
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  761,200
<ALLOWANCES>                                     7,000
<INVENTORY>                                    556,208
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,014,700
<PP&E>                                         168,400
<DEPRECIATION>                                 118,600
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,485,400
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,208,700
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        1,882,500
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        92,200
<OTHER-SE>                                  (6,801,400)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,485,400
<SALES>                                      2,884,500
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,884,500
<CGS>                                        2,291,900
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,291,900
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               815,200
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (295,500)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (558,100)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (558,100)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (558,100)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.01)
        



</TABLE>
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.fmcs.gov","title":"Online Surveys - Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"38jOy2F9OV\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.fmcs.gov\/services\/resolving-labor-management-disputes\/eservices-tags\/online-surveys\/\">Online Surveys<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.fmcs.gov\/services\/resolving-labor-management-disputes\/eservices-tags\/online-surveys\/embed\/#?secret=38jOy2F9OV\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Online Surveys” — Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service\" data-secret=\"38jOy2F9OV\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script type=\"text\/javascript\">\n\/* <![CDATA[ *\/\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n\/* ]]> *\/\n<\/script>\n"}
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7312

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus GARY E. WEST, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CR-96-269-A) Submitted: November 24, 1998 Decided: December 21, 1998 Before WIDENER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Gary E. West, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Christian Pilger, IV, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Gary E. West seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his post-conviction motion filed under Fed. R. Crim. P. 35 and district court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration. West’s notice of appeal was filed outside of the appeal period and beyond the time in which the district court could have granted him an extension of time to appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(b) (providing ten-day appeal period and thirty-day extension upon showing of excusable neglect for filing notice of appeal in criminal cases); see also United States v. Breit , 754 F.2d 526, 528-29 (4th Cir. 1985) (ten-day period applies to Rule 35 motions). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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 32.0



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 HealthExtras, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2005, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the Report), the undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section.1350, as added by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



1. The Quarterly 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 as of and for the period covered by the Report.



|               |  |                                     
|-------------- |  | ------------------------------------
|August 5, 2005 |  | /s/ David T. Blair                  
|               |  | David T. Blair                      
|               |  | Chief Executive Officer and Director
|               | 
|August 5, 2005 |  | /s/ Michael P. Donovan              
|               |  | Michael P. Donovan                  
|               |  | Chief Financial Officer and         
|               |  | Chief Accounting Officer
Exhibit 99.1


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



I, Kobi Alexander, Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive
Officer of Comverse Technology, Inc. (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 my knowledge:

(1)   the accompanying Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form 10-K of the
      Company for the period ending January 31, 2003 (the "Report") filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission, 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
      Company.





Dated: May 30, 2003

                                 /s/ Kobi Alexander*
                                 ---------------------------------------------
                                 Name: Kobi Alexander
                                 Title: Chairman of the Board of Directors and
                                        Chief Executive Officer



*A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 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.
Providing Practical, Customized Conflict Training 

FMCS Institute for Conflict Management

 Mediation Skills

 Negotiation Skills

 Becoming a Labor Arbitrator

 Labor Arbitration for Advocates

 Facilitation Skills

 Advanced Communication and Leadership

 Indispensable Elements of Effective Meetings

 Advanced Neutral Skills

 Art and Science of Inquiry

 Bridging the Gap in Generational Diversity

What Is the FMCS Institute for Conflict Management? 

The FMCS Institute for Conflict Management provides centralized classroom training in mediation, arbitration, workplace violence prevention, negotiations, and organizational development. Courses are offered away from the worksite to foster a receptive and safe learning 

environment. By offering curricula in a variety of work-related subjects, customers' particular 

requirements receive special attention. We work with respected academicians, labor leaders, management leaders, and arbitrators in providing the latest in conflict management 

theories and practice. Our courses draw participants from both labor and management in 

many industries. We will design courses specifically to meet your needs. 

What Does the Institute Teach? 

Institute courses include training in: 

If your organization is looking for ways to improve its customer relations, better manage 

conflict, develop core values that put people first, and improve personnel procedures, call 

on the Institute to help you design a program that suits your needs. 

Are you prepared with the necessary training to meet the real-world challenges of 

labor-management relations and organizational change? 

FMCS | One Independence Square | 250 E Street SW, Washington, D.C. 20427 | 202-606-8100 | www.fmcs.gov
“With the help of respected academicians, labor leaders, management leaders, and arbitrators, we customize 

centralized classroom training in mediation, arbitration, workplace violence prevention, negotiations, and

organizational development. Customers’ particular requirements receive special attention.”

Where Are the Courses Offered? 

Courses are offered at locations throughout the country 

and can be customized to meet special needs. For the 

convenience of our customers, we can make arrangements with a quality hotel or conference center and give 

courses at a location of your choosing. Our focus is to provide a comfortable and safe teaching environment, where 

openness and experimentation are encouraged. Our objective is for you to return to your work environment with 

real skills acquired from veteran practitioners.

How Much Does It Cost to Register for a Course? 

Pricing for courses is affordable, and both group and multiple course discounts are 

available. Many courses are approved for CLE credit for attorneys. 

For More Information 

For more information about the FMCS Institute, course offerings, locations, and 

dates, visit our website at www.fmcs.gov or call 202-606-3627.

FMCS | One Independence Square | 250 E Street SW, Washington, D.C. 20427 | 202-606-8100 | www.fmcs.gov
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.fmcs.gov","title":"FMCS Statement on Labor Negotiations Between Bath Iron Works and International Association of Machinists Local S6 - Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"QjdiBSedbk\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.fmcs.gov\/fmcs-statement-on-labor-negotiations-between-bath-iron-works-and-international-association-of-machinists-local-s6\/\">FMCS Statement on Labor Negotiations  Between Bath Iron Works and International Association of Machinists Local S6<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.fmcs.gov\/fmcs-statement-on-labor-negotiations-between-bath-iron-works-and-international-association-of-machinists-local-s6\/embed\/#?secret=QjdiBSedbk\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“FMCS Statement on Labor Negotiations  Between Bath Iron Works and International Association of Machinists Local S6” — Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service\" data-secret=\"QjdiBSedbk\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script type=\"text\/javascript\">\n\/* <![CDATA[ *\/\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n\/* ]]> *\/\n<\/script>\n","description":"WASHINGTON, D.C. (Aug. 4, 2020) \u2013 The Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) issued the following statement today on the labor negotiations between Bath Iron Works and International Association of Machinists Local S6: \u201cRepresentatives from Bath Iron Works and International Association of Machinists Local S6 are meeting with FMCS assistance this week to continue their […]"}
In The 

Court of Appeals 

Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo 

 

No. 07-23-00038-CV 

 

ELKIN-BORGELT, LLC AND SHERRY ELKIN, APPELLANTS 

V. 

ESTATE OF ROGER WALDO BORGELT, INDIVIDUALLY AND DERIVATIVELY ON 

BEHALF OF ELKIN-BORGELT, LLC, APPELLEE 

On Appeal from the 207th District Court 

Hays County, Texas 

Trial Court No. 21-0744, Honorable S. K. Tibbe, Presiding 

April 12, 2023 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before QUINN, C.J., and DOSS and YARBROUGH, JJ. 

Appellants, Elkin-Borgelt, LLC and Sherry Elkin, appeal from the trial court’s 

order.

1

 Now pending before this Court is Appellants’ unopposed motion seeking voluntary

dismissal of the appeal. The Court finds that the motion complies with the requirements 

of Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.1(a)(1) and that granting the motion will not prevent 

1 Originally appealed to the Third Court of Appeals, this appeal was transferred to this Court by the 

Texas Supreme Court pursuant to its docket equalization efforts. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 73.001.
2

any party from seeking relief to which it would otherwise be entitled. As no decision of 

the Court has been delivered to date, we grant the motion. The appeal is dismissed. 

Because the motion does not reflect an agreement of the parties concerning the payment 

of costs, costs will be taxed against Appellants. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(d). No motion 

for rehearing will be entertained and our mandate will issue forthwith.

Per Curiam
#### Norman RATTLIFF, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Gerald McPEAK, Superintendent, New River Jail; N.H. Pelkins, Correctional Officer River Valley Regional Jail; John Doe, Jr., Physician, New River Valley Regional Jail, Valley Regional Supervisor, New., Primary Care, Defendants—Appellees.

No. 09-7645.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Dec. 8, 2010.

Decided: Dec. 23, 2010.

*744Norman Rattliff, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Norman Rattliff, Jr., appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(l) (2006), for failure to state a claim, and denying reconsideration of that order. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *See Rattliff v. McPeak,*No. 7:08-cv-00551-gec-mfu, 2008 WL 5427760 (W.D.Va. Dec. 31, 2008) & (Mar. 19, 2009). Further, we deny Rattliff s motion for the 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.

*AFFIRMED.*
Skip to main content    

      Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission    

En Español

            - About FMSHRC               - News
              - Commissioners
              - Chairman and Commissioner Tenure
              - Administrative Law Judges
            - Guides               - Frequently Asked Questions
              - FOIA Guide
              - How a Case Proceeds Before the Commission
              - Guide to Commission Proceedings
              - Requests to Reopen
              - Instructions for Electronic Filing
              - Videoconference Hearings
              - Section 105(c)(3) Complaints
            - Decisions               - Review Commission Decisions
              - ALJ Decisions
              - Blue Books
            - Review Commission Arguments & Meetings               - Oral Arguments
              - Meetings
            - The Mine Act & Procedural Rules               - The Mine Act
              - Procedural Rules
              - Changes to Procedural Rules
            - FOIA               - Submit a FOIA Request
              - FOIA Guide
              - Rules
              - FOIA References
              - FOIA Library
              - FOIA Public Liaison
              - FOIA Reports
              - Proposed FOIA Rules
            - Reports & Budget Submissions               - Strategic Plans
              - Budget and Annual Performance Reports
              - Buy American Reports
              - Performance Accountability Reports
              - Sustainability Report
              - Reports to Congress
              - Contingency Plan
              - Reports to the President
            - Cases on Review               - Cases Currently on Review Before the Commission
              - Commission Decisions On Appeal
            - Contact Us

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-                   Secretary of Labor v. Nally & Hamilton Enterprises, Inc.               

#   Secretary of Labor v. Nally & Hamilton Enterprises, Inc. 

Nally KENT 2011-434 Meeting Notice 12-17-15.pdf

Nally KENT 2011-434 Meeting Notice 12-17-15.htm

secretary-labor-v-nally-hamilton-docket-kent2011-434-10am.mp3

##### Footer Links

-  EEO Policies 
-  No Fear Act Notice 
-  Employee Ethical Conduct 
-  Equal Access to Justice Act 
-  Motions to Approve Settlement 
-  Non-Discrimination 
-  Reasonable Accommodation Procedures 
-  Privacy Act 
-  Sunshine Act Regulations 
-  USA.gov 
-  FMSHRC Privacy Policy 
-  Vulnerability Disclosure Policy 

### The Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission

#### 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,Suite 520NWashington, DC 20004-1710Phone: 771-210-1887 TTY/TDD (202)434-4000 ext. 293E-mail: fmshrc@fmshrc.gov