alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
H. Res. 1576 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

November 19, 2024. 

Resolved, That at any time after adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, 

declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole 

House on the state of the Union for consideration of the bill 

(H.R. 1449) to amend the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 to 

increase the frequency of lease sales, to require replacement 

sales, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill 

shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined 

to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and 

controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 

Committee on Natural Resources or their respective designees. After general debate the bill shall be considered for 

amendment under the five-minute rule. The bill shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the 

bill are waived. No amendment to the bill shall be in order 

except those printed in the report of the Committee on Rules 

accompanying this resolution. Each such amendment may be 
2 

•HRES 1576 EH 

offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered 

only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the 

report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 

opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not 

be subject to a demand for division of the question in the 

House or in the Committee of the Whole. All points of order 

against such amendments are waived. At the conclusion of 

consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall 

rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments 

as may have been adopted. The previous question shall be 

considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to 

final passage without intervening motion except one motion 

to recommit. 

SEC. 2. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 

order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 9495) to amend 

the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to postpone tax deadlines 

and reimburse paid late fees for United States nationals who 

are unlawfully or wrongfully detained or held hostage abroad, 

to terminate the tax-exempt status of terrorist supporting organizations, and for other purposes. All points of order 

against consideration of the bill are waived. The amendment 

in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee 

on Ways and Means now printed in the bill shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as 
3 

•HRES 1576 EH 

read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as 

amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further 

amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 

Committee on Ways and Means or their respective designees; 

and (2) one motion to recommit. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          11,131
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  158,077
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    216,068
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               388,105
<PP&E>                                         320,700
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 776,593
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          158,002
<BONDS>                                        309,185
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         15
<COMMON>                                        12,792
<OTHER-SE>                                     204,539
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   776,593
<SALES>                                        262,909
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               262,909
<CGS>                                          227,155
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  227,155
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                26,511
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,262
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,205
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,187
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,018
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,018
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .10
        

</TABLE>
Qualified Zone Academy Bonds: Allocations for

 2005, 2006 and 2007

State

2005 2006 2007

Alabama 7,004 7,698 7,698

Alaska 655 677 677

Arizona 7,913 9,412 9,412

Arkansas 5,008 3,921 3,921

California 48,956 48,404 48,404

Colorado 4,606 5,440 5,440

Connecticut 2,937 3,346 3,346

Delaware 634 801 801

District of Columbia 972 1,180 1,180

Florida 22,693 20,271 20,271

Georgia 10,713 13,322 13,322

Hawaii 1,236 1,129 1,129

Idaho 1,458 1,468 1,468

Illinois 16,819 14,790 14,790

Indiana 6,444 7,944 7,944

Iowa 2,747 3,356 3,356

Kansas 3,043 3,459 3,459

Kentucky 6,223 6,148 6,148

Louisiana 7,923 7,677 7,677

Maine 1,574 1,704 1,704

Maryland 4,986 5,563 5,563

Massachusetts 6,888 6,579 6,579

Michigan 11,885 12,275 12,275

Minnesota 3,972 4,229 4,229

Mississippi 4,817 5,861 5,861

Missouri 6,360 6,764 6,764

Montana 1,468 1,314 1,314

Nebraska 1,775 1,714 1,714

Nevada 2,578 2,669 2,669

New Hampshire 771 749 749

New Jersey 7,828 6,076 6,076

New Mexico 3,571 3,562 3,562

New York 28,598 28,328 28,328

North Carolina 13,618 11,444 11,444

North Dakota 644 718 718

Ohio 12,952 14,287 14,287

Oklahoma 4,648 5,573 5,573

Oregon 4,712 4,475 4,475

Pennsylvania 13,512 14,082 14,082

Rhode Island 1,278 1,304 1,304

South Carolina 5,451 6,425 6,425

South Dakota 1,004 924 924

Tennessee 8,758 8,950 8,950

Texas 39,142 37,781 37,781

Utah 2,250 2,381 2,381

Vermont 549 482 482

Virginia 7,818 7,020 7,020

Washington 8,092 6,528 6,528

West Virginia 3,275 2,833 2,833

Wisconsin 5,578 5,676 5,676

Wyoming 507 554 554

American Samoa 373 363 363

Guam 403 397 397

Northern Marianas 381 380 380

Puerto Rico 19,627 19,230 19,230

Virgin Islands 373 363 363

Source: Department of the Treasury

 Office of Tax Analysis

(in thousands of dollars)

Calendar Year Funds are First Available
#### 1313.302-1-70 Non-commercial purchase orders.

Insert provision 1352.213-71, *Instructions for Submitting Quotations under the Simplified Acquisition Threshold—Non-Commercial,* or similar language in all solicitations for non-commercial purchase orders under the simplified acquisition threshold. The contracting officer shall indicate whether electronic submissions of quotations will be accepted. Paragraph (b)(4) of provision 1352.213-71 may be tailored based on the evaluation factors.
#### § 34.60 Purpose.

Sections 34.61 through 34.63 contain procedures for closeout and for subsequent disallowances and adjustments.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Glenroy Daniels, Respondent, v. Joseph Fazio et al., Appellants. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

Appellants appeal from an award of compensation subsequent to June 27, 1955. There is no dispute as to the facts. Claimant, while working as superintendent of the employer’s apartment house, sustained an injury which was diagnosed as a herniated intervertebral disc and which required an operation. He was also employed as a bus driver to which work he returned following his recovery. The doctors for the claimant and for the carrier both testified that he was suffering from a mild partial disability as a result of the back condition and that he should not do heavy work. He testified as part of his janitorial duties it was necessary to mop the halls in the building, mow the grass, clean the sheds, keep the cans in order, on occasions to move stoves and refrigerators and that once a week 25 to 30 cans of ashes and debris were removed from the apartment and were afterward left outside the building stacked and that the claimant would return these to the basement, usually five or six contained in each stack. His doctor testified that he should not lift anything over 50 pounds and that he had advised him not to return to the janitorial work or he might have a recurrence of his back trouble. The doctor for the carrier testified that claimant had a mild disability and that he agreed generally with his doctor although he thought he could return to his janitorial duties providing he did no heavy work. The contention of the appellants appears to be that even though it is admitted claimant has a mild partial disability and that his own physician advised him not to return to the janitorial duties, he is not entitled to an award unless he first attempts to do the work and it is shown he is unable to perform such tasks. Such is not the rule. The board has made a factual finding, amply supported by testimony, that claimant has suffered a disability and is entitled to an award therefor. We are unable to say that as a matter of law such is not the fact. There was substantial testimony to sustain the finding of the board. Decision and award unanimously affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board.
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT UNITED STATES OF AM ERIC A, Plaintiff - Appe lle e , v. R YAN FR ANK B ONNEAU, De fe nda

nt - Appe lla

nt. No. 15-30106

D.C . No. 3:14-c r-00257-M O M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Distric t of Ore gon M i c ha e l W . M osm a

n, Distric t Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d M arc h 15, 2016 ** B e fore : GOODW IN, LEAVY, a nd C HRISTEN, C irc uit Judge s. R y an Frank B onne a

u a ppe a ls from

the distric t c ourt’ s judgm e nt a nd c ha lle nge s his guilty-ple a c onvic tion a

nd 24-m onth se nte nc e for c o nspira c y to posse s s a nd distribute

c ontrolle d substa

nc e s, in viola

tion of 21 U.S.C . §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. Pursua

nt to Ande rs v . C

alifornia , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), B o nne a u ’ s 

# FIL ED MAR 21 2016 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se eFe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).c ounse l ha s file d a brie f stating tha

t the re are no grounds for re lie f, a long with a m otion to withdra

w a s c ounse l of re c ord. B onne a u file d a pro se supple m e nta l ope ning brie f and a lso submitte d a re ply brie f on De c e m

be r 7, 2015, whic h

we dire c t the C le rk to file . No a nswe ring brie f ha s be e n file d. B onne a u wa ive d his right to a

ppe a l his c onvic tion a

nd se nte nc e , with thre e e xc e ptions not a

p p lic a ble he re . Our indepe nde nt re vie w of the re c ord pursua nt to Pe nson v . Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), disc lose s no a rgua b le issuea s to the va lidity of the wa ive r. Se eUnite d State s v . W atson , 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th C ir. 2009). W e a c c ordingly

dismiss thea

ppe a l. S e e id. at 988. To thee xte nt tha

t B onne a u’ s pro seargum e nts fa ll outside the sc ope of the wa ive r, we re

je c t the m . C ontra

ry to his c onte ntion, thedistric t c ourt prope rly de nie d his motion under Fe de ra l R ule of C rim ina l Proc e dure 36 be c a u se the re wa s no e rror in thejudgm e nt, whic h is c onsistent with the se nte nc e to whic h the pa rtie s a gre e d in theple a

a gre e m e nt. W e de c line to a ddre s s B onne a u’ s c la im of ine ffe c tive a ssista

nc e of c ounse l on dire c t a ppe a l. Se eUnite d State

s v . Rahman , 642 F.3d 1257, 1259-60 (9th C ir. 2011). B onne a u’ s m otion to e xpe dite is de nie d a s m oot. C ounse l’ s m otion to withdra w is G RANT E D. AFFIRM E D in par t; DISM ISSE D in par t. 1 5 - 3 0 1 0 6 2
### §931a. Level of loan programs under Rural Electrification and Telephone Revolving Fund

On and after October 28, 1991, no funds in this Act or any other Act shall be available to carry out loan programs under the Rural Electrification and Telephone Revolving Fund at levels other than those provided for in advance in appropriations Acts.

(Pub. L. 102–142, title III, Oct. 28, 1991, 105 Stat. 903.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1992, and not as part of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 which comprises this chapter.
#### Evelyn Dorfman, Appellant, v. Jack Dorfman, Respondent.

Motion to dismiss appeal denied on condition that appellant argues or submits the appeal at the November 1960 Term, beginning October 31, I960, for which term the appeal is ordered to be placed on the calendar. Motion to dispense with printing and for other relief, granted to the extent of permitting the appeal to be heard on the original papers (including the typed minutes) and on typewritten briefs. The parties are directed to file five copies and to serve one copy of their respective briefs. The appellant’s brief must be served and filed on or before October 17, I960.
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2



                  CERTIFICATION OF 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 accompanying Form 10-Q of Jo-Ann Stores Inc., (the
"Company") for the period ending August 3, 2002, I, Brian P. Carney, Executive
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:

(1) such Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended August 3, 2002, 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 such Form 10-Q of the Company for the period
ended August 3, 2002, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.



Dated:  September 17, 2002



                           /s/ Brian P. Carney
                           ---------------------------
                           By:   Brian P. Carney
                           Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer







                                    Page 24
1 Larry G. Massanari has been appointed to serve as Acting Commissioner of

Social Security, and is substituted as appellee pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c)(2). 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 01-1285

___________ Frank Caruso, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Western District of Arkansas. Larry G. Massanari, 1 Commissioner, * [UNPUBLISHED] Social Security Administration, * * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: September 7, 2001 Filed: September 21, 2001

___________ Before WOLLMAN, Chief Judge, MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, and BYE, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.2 The Honorable Beverly Stites Jones, United States Magistrate Judge for the

Western District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). -2- Frank Caruso appeals the district court’s 2 order affirming the denial of supplemental security income. Having carefully reviewed the record, see Dunahoo v. Apfel , 241 F.3d 1033, 1037 (8th Cir. 2001) (standard of review), we affirm.
Inhis November 1996 application, Caruso alleged disability since October 1996 from chronic hepatitis C, right-knee degenerative arthritis, and bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. After a hearing, an administrative law judge (ALJ) found that Caruso was capable of performing his past relevant work, and thus he was not disabled.
Caruso primarily contends that the ALJ improperly discredited his and his witnesses’ testimony. We disagree. The ALJ summarized the testimony of Caruso and his witnesses, and cited the factors in Polaski v. Heckler , 739 F.2d 1320, 1322 (8th Cir. 1984); then, noting multiple inconsistencies in the record, the ALJ found Caruso’s subjective complaints were not credible to the extent alleged. See Dunahoo , 241 F.3d at1038 (if ALJ discredits claimant and gives good reasons for doing so, this court will defer to his judgment even if every factor is not discussed in depth); cf. Young v. Apfel , 221 F.3d 1065, 1068 (8th Cir. 2000) (where same evidence would support discounting testimony of claimant’s husband, ALJ’s failure to articulate reasons for discrediting him is inconsequential).
Caruso’s other suggestions of error are also meritless. See Ply v. Massanari , 251 F.3d 777, 779 (8th Cir. 2001) (per curiam) (ALJ is responsible for determining residual functional capacity based on all relevant evidence, including medical records, observations of treating physicians and others, and claimant’s description of his limitations); Hajek

v. Shalala , 30 F.3d 89, 92 (8th Cir. 1994) (conclusory statement that ALJ failed to consider combined effects of impairments was unfounded where ALJ-3-

noted each impairment and concluded that impairments, alone or in combination, were not of listing-level severity). Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                   EXHIBIT 11

                                CLX ENERGY, INC.
                   Computation of Net Income (Loss) Per Share


                                                      Year ended
                                                     September 30,
                                                -----------------------
                                                   2003        2002
                                                ----------  -----------
<S>                                             <C>         <C>

Income (loss) before cumulative effect of
  accounting change                             $   66,245  (  368,855)

Cumulative effect of accounting change                   -           -
                                                ----------  -----------

Net income (loss)                               $  (10,620) (  368,855)
                                                ==========  ===========

Weighted average number of common
  shares outstanding                             2,631,936   2,631,936

Common equivalent shares
  representing shares issuable
  upon exercise of outstanding
  dilutive options                                       -           -
                                                ----------  -----------

                                                 2,631,936   2,631,936
                                                ==========  ===========

 Net income (loss) per share
    Basic:
       Income (loss) before cumulative
         effect of accounting change            $     0.02  (     0.14)
       Cumulative effect of accounting change            -           -
                                                ----------  -----------

       Net income (loss)                        $     0.02        0.14)
                                                ==========  ===========

    Diluted:
       Income (loss) before cumulative
         effect of accounting change            $     0.02  (     0.14)
       Cumulative effect of accounting change            -           -
                                                ----------  -----------

       Net income (loss)                        $     0.02  (     0.14)
                                                ==========  ===========
</TABLE>


<PAGE>
Editorial Note on Part 842
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 842 appear at 81 FR 83688, Nov. 22, 2016.

§ 842.50 Statute of limitations. ( a ) A claim must be presented to the Air Force within 2 years after it accrues. It accrues when the claimant discovers or reasonably should have discovered the existence of the act that resulted in the claimed loss or injury.
( b ) In computing the statutory time period, the day of the incident is excluded and the day the claim was filed is included.
( c ) War or armed conflict does not toll the statute of limitations.
[55 FR 2809, Jan. 29, 1990. Redesignated and amended at 81 FR 83692, 83693, Nov. 22, 2016]
Case: 1:12-cv-00664 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/31/12 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:1
Case: 1:12-cv-00664 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/31/12 Page 2 of 7 PageID #:2
Case: 1:12-cv-00664 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/31/12 Page 3 of 7 PageID #:3
Case: 1:12-cv-00664 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/31/12 Page 4 of 7 PageID #:4
Case: 1:12-cv-00664 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/31/12 Page 5 of 7 PageID #:5
Case: 1:12-cv-00664 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/31/12 Page 6 of 7 PageID #:6
Case: 1:12-cv-00664 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/31/12 Page 7 of 7 PageID #:7
### §§5721 to 5723. Repealed. Pub. L. 115–334, title III, §3201(b)(2), Dec. 20, 2018, 132 Stat. 4616

Section 5721, Pub. L. 95–501, title VII, §701, as added Pub. L. 104–127, title II, §252, Apr. 4, 1996, 110 Stat. 971, defined "eligible trade organization" for this subchapter.

Section 5722, Pub. L. 95–501, title VII, §702, as added Pub. L. 104–127, title II, §252, Apr. 4, 1996, 110 Stat. 971; amended Pub. L. 107–171, title III, §3105(a), May 13, 2002, 116 Stat. 290; Pub. L. 110–246, title III, §3104(a), June 18, 2008, 122 Stat. 1833; Pub. L. 113–188, title I, §101(f), Nov. 26, 2014, 128 Stat. 2018, related to foreign market development cooperator program to maintain and develop foreign markets for United States agricultural commodities and products.

Section 5723, Pub. L. 95–501, title VII, §703, as added Pub. L. 104–127, title II, §252, Apr. 4, 1996, 110 Stat. 972; amended Pub. L. 107–171, title III, §3105(b), May 13, 2002, 116 Stat. 291; Pub. L. 110–246, title III, §3104(b), June 18, 2008, 122 Stat. 1833; Pub. L. 113–79, title III, §3103, Feb. 7, 2014, 128 Stat. 779, related to funding to carry out this subchapter and program priorities.
#### Thomas E. Malloy, Respondent, v Douglas A. Trombley, Appellant.

(Appeal No. 2.)

Order unanimously reversed, without costs, motion granted and complaint dismissed. Same memorandum as in *Trombley v Malloy*(66 AD2d 1020). (Appeal from order of Niagara Supreme Court— summary judgment.) Present—Marsh, P. J., Moule, Simons, Hancock, Jr., and Schnepp., JJ.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

SHIRLEY WASHBURN, 

ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF 

DONALD WASHBURN,

Respondent

v.

NORTHERN HEALTH FACILITIES, INC.; 

EXTENDICARE HEALTH FACILITIES, 

INC.; EXTENDICARE HEALTH 

SERVICES, INC.; EXTENDICARE 

HEALTH NETWORK, INC.; 

EXTENDICARE HOLDINGS, INC.; 

EXTENDICARE, INC.; EXTENDICARE 

REIT; EXTENDICARE, L.P.,

Petitioners

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 695 MAL 2015

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 28th day of February, 2017, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.

Justice Donohue did not participate in the consideration or decision of this 

matter.