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

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7783 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7783

To nullify certain documents issued by the Equal Employment Opportunity 
     Commission relating to gender-based workplace discrimination.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 21, 2024

 Mr. Ogles (for himself, Mr. Wilson of South Carolina, Mr. Fitzgerald, 
  Mr. Good of Virginia, Mrs. Miller of Illinois, Mr. LaMalfa, and Mr. 
   Timmons) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To nullify certain documents issued by the Equal Employment Opportunity 
     Commission relating to gender-based workplace discrimination.

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

SECTION 1. NULLIFICATION OF EEOC GUIDANCE AND FACT SHEET RELATING TO 
              GENDER-BASED WORKPLACE DISCRIMINATION.

    The proposed guidance entitled ``PROPOSED Enforcement Guidance on 
Harassment in the Workplace'' (dated September 29, 2023), and the fact 
sheet entitled ``Protections Against Employment Discrimination Based on 
Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity'' (issued on June 15, 2021), 
published by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission shall have no 
force or effect, and the Commission may not issue any identical or 
substantially similar guidance or fact sheet.
                                 <all>
```
NO. 07-10-0046-CV 

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

AT AMARILLO 

PANEL C 

FEBRUARY 17, 2010 

______________________________ 

ROBERT PATRICK WHITEAKER AND 

ROBERT WHITEAKER RANCHES, INC., APPELLANTS 

V. 

DOUG LATHEM, APPELLEE 

_________________________________ 

FROM THE 69TH DISTRICT COURT OF HARTLEY COUNTY; 

NO.4371-H; HONORABLE RON ENNS, JUDGE 

_______________________________ 

Before QUINN, C.J., and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ. 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Pending before this Court is Appellants' Motion to Dismiss Appeal Without 

Prejudice in which they represent that the issues presented in this appeal have been 

rendered moot by this Court's Order on Petition for Writ of Mandamus and Judgment 

rendered in cause number 07-10-00001-CV on February 4, 2010. Without passing on 

the merits of the case, the motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed 
2 

without prejudice. Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1). Having dismissed the appeal at 

Appellants= request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will 

issue forthwith. 

Patrick A. Pirtle 

 Justice
**Exhibit 32**

 

# **CERTIFICATION**

#  

The undersigned certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, that:

 

(1)                               Theaccompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended April 30,2008 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                               Theinformation contained in the accompanying Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

 
| Date:  | June 13, 2008 |                    |   | /s/ Rodney A. Young     |
|--------|---------------|-------------------------|--------|-------------------------|
|   |          | President and           |
|   |          | Chief Executive Officer |
|   |          |                    |
|   |          |                    |
| Date:  | June 13, 2008 |                    |   | /s/ William J. Kullback |
|   |          | Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
* 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

August 20, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-40155

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RAFAEL JAIMES-ARANDA, also known as

Justantino Sanchez-Aranda,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. B-02-CR-554-1

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

Before JONES, WIENER, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

 Rafael Jaimes-Aranda appeals the sentence imposed following

his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United States

after deportation/removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. 

Jaimes-Aranda complains that his sentence was improperly enhanced

pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) based on a prior conviction. He

argues that the sentencing provision is unconstitutional. 

Jaimes-Aranda thus contends that his sentence should not exceed
No. 03-40155

-2-

the maximum terms of imprisonment prescribed in 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(a). 

In Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235

(1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of

separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing

provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. 

Jaimes-Aranda acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by

Almendarez-Torres, but asserts that the decision has been cast

into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). 

He seeks to preserve his argument for further review. 

Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi,

530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984

(5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres

“unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule

it.” Dabeit, 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and

citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.

The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of

filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks

that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED. 

AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > High-Wage Jobs in a Competitive Global Economy

              																	United States. Congress. Joint Economic Committee, 1956-					 and 	One Hundred Second Congress, 1991-1993. 						*High-Wage Jobs in a Competitive Global Economy : Hearing Before the Joint Economic Committee, Congress of the United States, One Hundred Second Congress, Second Session, September 16, 1992*,												Washington: 								U.S. Government Printing Office, 										September 16, 1992,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/879,			accessed on September 22, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
Editorial Note on Part 862
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 862 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 862.1435 Ketones (nonquantitative) test system. ( a ) *Identification.* A ketones (nonquantitative) test system is a device intended to identify ketones in urine and other body fluids. Identification of ketones is used in the diagnosis and treatment of acidosis (a condition characterized by abnormally high acidity of body fluids) or ketosis (a condition characterized by increased production of ketone bodies such as acetone) and for monitoring patients on ketogenic diets and patients with diabetes.
( b ) *Classification.* Class I (general controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to § 862.9.
[52 FR 16122, May 1, 1987, as amended at 65 FR 2307, Jan. 14, 2000]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>  5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN FORM 10-QSB AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         417,194
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,691,379
<ALLOWANCES>                                 3,220,007
<INVENTORY>                                  1,015,054
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,336,569
<PP&E>                                       2,070,787
<DEPRECIATION>                                 277,609
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              18,805,667
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,767,681
<BONDS>                                      8,620,974
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        3,323,103
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    12,745,826
<OTHER-SE>                                (11,743,817)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                18,805,667
<SALES>                                      4,030,702
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,030,702
<CGS>                                        2,522,381
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,890,891
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             232,513
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (92,702)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (92,702)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (92,702)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.46)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.46)
        


</TABLE>
##### 



EXHIBIT 31.2
 Certification Pursuant To
Rules 13a-14(a) And 15d-14(a) Under The Securities Exchange Act Of 1934, As Amended
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Biopure Corporation (the Registrant);2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented
in this report;4.
    
    The Registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and have:
     5.
    
    The Registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the Registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
   Date: June 14, 2007
    /s/ Francis H. MurphyFrancis H. MurphyChief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 99.1

        Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18
                            of the United States Code

I, Thomas M. O'Flynn, Chief Financial Officer of PSEG Power LLC (the "Company"),
to the best of my  knowledge,  certify  that  (i) the  Quarterly  Report  of the
Company on Form 10-Q for the Quarter  ended  September  30, 2002 (the  "Periodic
Report") fully complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934  and  (ii) the  information  contained  in the
Periodic  Report  fairly  presents,  in all  material  respects,  the  financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.

                                                 /s/ Thomas M. O'Flynn
                                                 ------------------------
                                                 Thomas M. O'Flynn
                                                 Chief Financial Officer
                                                 November 1, 2002
(LOGO)

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
200 East Las Olas Boulevard
Suite 1700
Ft. Lauderdale FL 33301
Telephone (954) 764 7111
Facsimile (954) 525 4433

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

To the Board of Directors of Ocwen Federal Bank FSB

We have  examined  management's  assertion  about Ocwen Federal Bank FSB's ("the
Bank") compliance with the minimum  servicing  standards in the Mortgage Bankers
Association of America's (MBA's) Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage
Bankers,  with respect to certain  mortgage  loan pools for which the trustee is
Norwest  Bank  Minnesota,  National  Association,  as  of and for the year ended
December 31, 1998, included in the accompanying management assertion. Management
is responsible for the Bank's compliance with those minimum servicing standards.
Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's  assertion about the
Bank's compliance based on our examination.

Our  examination  was  made in  accordance  with  standards  established  by the
American  Institute of Certified Public Accountants and,  accordingly,  included
examining,  on a test  basis,  evidence  about the  Bank's  compliance  with the
minimum  servicing   standards  and  performing  such  other  procedures  as  we
considered  necessary  in the  circumstances.  We believe  that our  examination
provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.  Our examination does not provide a
legal  determination  on  the  Bank's  compliance  with  the  minimum  servicing
standards.

In  our  opinion,  management's  assertion  that,  except  as  indicated  in the
accompanying management assertion, the Bank has complied with the aforementioned
minimum  servicing  standards as of and for the year ended  December 31, 1998 is
fairly stated, in all material respects.

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

July 14, 1999
Exhibit 21

             Significant Subsidiaries of PSEG Energy Holdings Inc.

Subsidiary            Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization
----------            ---------------------------------------------

PSEG Resources Inc.                   New Jersey
RCMC Inc.                             New Jersey
PSRC II, Inc.                         Delaware
PSEG Global Inc.                      New Jersey
PSEG Global USA Inc.                  New Jersey
PSEG International Inc.               Delaware
PSEG Americas Inc.                    Delaware
PSEG Americas Ltd.                    Bermuda
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.3

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
333-81208, 333-71954, 333-70976, 333-60132, 333-43038, 333-40322 and 333-35876
on Form S-3 and Nos. 333-70982, 333-38964 and 333-35874 on Form S-8 of our
report dated May 29, 2002 relating to the financial statements of SafeScience
Newco, Ltd., appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of GlycoGenesys,
Inc. (formerly SafeScience, Inc.) for the year ended December 31, 2001.


/s/ Deloitte & Touche

Hamilton, Bermuda
May 29, 2002
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996             DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996             DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                       9,386,069               2,202,004
<SECURITIES>                                35,243,624              20,718,674
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,426,351               4,412,561
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (650,000)               (100,397)
<INVENTORY>                                    103,030                  29,074
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               575,597                 702,344
<PP&E>                                       5,309,365               2,663,588
<DEPRECIATION>                             (2,105,434)             (1,179,906)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              53,487,175              29,551,149
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        7,377,456               3,688,062
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                       103,438                  84,920
<OTHER-SE>                                  45,979,762              25,749,448
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                53,487,175              29,551,149
<SALES>                                     17,171,434              15,482,111
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            17,171,434              15,482,111
<CGS>                                        7,680,856               5,944,112
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,680,856               5,944,112
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            24,196,012              19,136,446
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (12,817,506)             (9,023,854)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    18,629                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                              (12,836,132)             (9,023,854)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.37)                  (1.37)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                9,398,931               6,580,922
        

</TABLE>
#### State op Connecticut *v.*Linda Izzo

*Joseph D. Harbaugh,*in support of the petition.

Submitted October 23

decided October 23, 1968

The petition by the defendant for review of the amount and security of the bond in the appeal from the Circuit Court in the fourteenth circuit is dismissed without hearing.
Editorial Note on Part 874
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 874 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 874.4750 Laryngostroboscope. ( a ) *Identification.* A laryngostroboscope is a device that is intended to allow observation of glottic action during phonation. The device operates by focusing a stroboscopic light through a lens for direct or mirror reflected viewing of glottic action. The light and microphone that amplifies acoustic signals from the glottic area may or may not contact the patient.
( b ) *Classification.* Class I (general controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to the limitations in § 874.9.
[55 FR 48440, Nov. 20, 1990, as amended at 59 FR 63009, Dec. 7, 1994; 66 FR 38801, July 25, 2001]
October 15, 2015

Mr. Rex J. Sanders

Rex Sanders Aerial Photography and Videography

14335 State Route 139

Minford, OH 45653

Dear Mr . Sanders :

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your petition for an exemption from

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process your

request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can n o t Process Your Request

We received your exemption request , posted to the public docket on July 24, 2015, filed in

D ocket No

. FAA− 20 15

− 3205 , but we are unable to process your request any further. Your

petition does no t comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider

the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief and the extent of

the relief you seek.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would

benefit the public as a whole.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

For more detailed information relating to submitting petitions for exemption, please visit

http://aes.faa.gov/petition/index.html . This website helps the petitioner to meet Federal

Aviation A dministration (FAA) requirement outlines in § 11.81 and helps ans wer any

questions you may have.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must submit the requested information

within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption

at least 120 da ys before the proposed effective date of the exemption.2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further.

If you have any questions you may call the 333 Information Line (202) 267

- 2999.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and

Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure s34