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

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1254 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1254

     To amend the Cuban Democracy Act of 1992 to limit provisions 
 restricting trade in food and to terminate the denial of foreign tax 
                      credit with respect to Cuba.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 15, 1995

  Mr. Rangel introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
Committee on International Relations, and in addition to the Committee 
 on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
  Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 
           within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To amend the Cuban Democracy Act of 1992 to limit provisions 
 restricting trade in food and to terminate the denial of foreign tax 
                      credit with respect to Cuba.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITATION OF PROVISIONS RESTRICTING TRADE IN FOOD.

    (a) International Cooperation.--Section 1704(b)(2)(B)(ii) of the 
Cuban Democracy Act of 1992 (22 U.S.C. 6003(b)(2)(B)(ii)) is amended by 
striking ``medicines or'' and inserting ``food (whether processed or 
unprocessed), medicines, or''.
    (b) Support for the Cuban People.--Section 1705(c) of the Cuban 
Democracy Act of 1992 (22 U.S.C. 6004(c)) is amended by striking 
``Exports'' and all that follows through ``Exports of medicines or'' 
and inserting ``Exports of Food, Medicines, and Medical Supplies.--
Exports of food (whether processed or unprocessed), medicines, or''.

SEC. 2. TERMINATION OF DENIAL OF FOREIGN TAX CREDIT WITH RESPECT TO 
              CUBA.

    Subparagraph (A) of section 901(j)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code 
of 1986 (relating to denial of foreign tax credit, etc., with respect 
to certain foreign countries) is amended by adding at the end thereof 
the following new flush sentence:
                ``Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, this 
                subsection shall not apply to Cuba after the date which 
                is 60 days after the date of the enactment of this 
                sentence.''.

                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 32.1


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


In connection with the Quarterly  Report of JACOBS  FINANCIAL  GROUP,  INC. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended  February 28, 2006 (the "Report")
filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission,  I, John M. Jacobs,  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 Company's  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.



         April 19, 2006                         /s/ John M. Jacobs
                                                    --------------------------
                                                    John M. Jacobs
                                                    Chief Executive Officer
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

WAL-MART STORES, INC. AND 

WAL-MART STORES TEXAS, LLC,

Appellants

V.

ALICE ANN RAZO,

Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-18-00110-CV

Appeal from the

171st District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 2016DCV4708)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The parties have filed a joint motion to set aside the trial court’s judgment and remand the 

cause to the trial court for further proceedings. See TEX.R.APP.P. 42.1(a)(2)(B). The motion is 

granted. Accordingly, we set aside the judgment of the trial court without regard to the merits and 

remand the cause to the trial court for further proceedings.

July 27, 2018

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                      10,713,000
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                       2,209,000
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               541,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 55,683,000
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                      17,969,000
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                        17,967,000
<LOANS>                                    210,084,000
<ALLOWANCE>                                  2,108,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             315,287,000
<DEPOSITS>                                 233,656,000
<SHORT-TERM>                                30,640,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          3,080,000
<LONG-TERM>                                 24,241,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        23,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  23,647,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             315,287,000
<INTEREST-LOAN>                             12,835,000
<INTEREST-INVEST>                            3,198,000
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               145,000
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            16,178,000
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           6,828,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           9,063,000
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        7,115,000
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  270,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                              24,000
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              7,472,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,232,000
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   1,232,000
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   819,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.34
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.22
<LOANS-NON>                                  2,004,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                 1,496,000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             1,996,000
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  187,000
<RECOVERIES>                                    29,000
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            2,108,000
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                         2,108,000
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                      1,886,000


</TABLE>
#### § 34.607 Audits—NOAA RESTORE Act Science Program.

NOAA and the Treasury Inspector General may conduct audits and reviews of recipient's accounts and activities relating to the Act as either of them deems appropriate.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Motor vehicle use map. AshleyNational Forest, Utah. Duchesne & Roosevelt Ranger District**
 
2013:Front | Back
2014:Front | Back
2016:Front | Back
 
SuDoc Number:A 13.28:AS 3/10/
Item Number:0080-G (online)
CGP systemNumber:000924134
 
January 4, 2018
<PAGE>
                                  EXHIBIT 32.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Avanir Pharmaceuticals (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Gerald
J. Yakatan, 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 result of operations of the
Company.

                                    /s/Gerald J. Yakatan, Ph.D.
                                    ------------------------------------
                                    Gerald J. Yakatan, Ph.D.
                                    Chief Executive Officer

                                    August 13, 2004



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to AVANIR Pharmaceuticals and will
be retained by AVANIR Pharmaceuticals and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission upon request.
www.gpo.gov

### §685. Payment free of liens or claims

No money paid to Indians under sections 684 to 686 of this title shall be subject to any lien or claim of attorneys or other persons. Before any payment is made under said sections, the Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians of Minnesota shall, in such manner as may be prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior, ratify and accept the provisions of said sections.

(Aug. 27, 1954, ch. 1011, §2, 68 Stat. 879.)

#### Section Referred to in Other Sections

This section is referred to in sections 684, 686 of this title.
#### Wells *v.*American Maize Products Co.

[No. 20,202.

Filed September 23, 1964.

Rehearing denied December 11, 1964. Petition to transfer dismissed January 13, 1965.]

*Winterhoff & Anderson, William W. Winterhoff*and *Dale A. Anderson,*of Lansing, Illinois, for appellant.

*Ice, Miller, Donadio & Ryan*and *James Donadío,*of Indianapolis, and *Galvin, Galvin & Leeney*and *Frank J. Galvin,*of Hammond, for appellee.

Hunter, C. J.

The appellee, American Maize Products Company, filed a verified petition asking that the Appellate Court and the Clerk of the Appellate Court dismiss the appeal in the above entitled cause for the reason that the appellant, Eugene S. Wells, did not file his brief within the thirty (30) days after submission as required by Rule 2-15 of the Supreme Court. The appeal herein was submitted on August 11, 1964, on which *596date the appellant filed transcript and assignment of errors in this cause. The appeal in this cause is one from the Industrial Board of Indiana.

Insofar as applicable to this cause, Rule 2-16 of the Supreme Court provides in part as follows: “ ... No extension of time will be granted on appeals from Awards of the Industrial Board.” The appellant’s brief was filed with the Clerk of this Court on September 11,1964.

Rule 2-15 of the Supreme Court of Indiana provides in its pertinent part as follows: “ . . . The Appellant shall have thirty (30) days after submission in which to file his brief, and if the brief is not filed within the time limited, the Clerk shall enter an order dismissing the appeal.”

The record herein discloses that the transcript and assignment of errors were filed with the Clerk on August 11, 1964. Appellant’s time within which to file his brief therefore expired on September 10, 1964, thirty (30) days after the submission of the cause. The appellant’s brief was filed on September 11, 1964 and said filing therefore was one (1) day late. *Members, etc.*v. *Adams*(1960), 240 Ind. 280, 163 N. E. 2d 745. Rule 2-15, *supra,*provides that if the brief is not filed within the time limited, the Clerk shall issue an order to dismiss the appeal unless petition for extension of time is on file and in the instant case this appeal being an award of the Industrial Board, no extension of time may be granted pursuant to Rule 2-16, *supra,*of the Supreme Court of Indiana.

Therefore, the Clerk of this Court is hereby ordered and directed to dismiss this appeal pursuant to Rules 2-15 and 2-16, *supra.*

Note.—Reported in 201 N. E. 2d 292.
40329.

#### FOWLER v. ALDRIDGE.

Eberhardt, Judge.

This is an automobile collision case in which the defendant filed a cross action. The jury found for the defendant in the full amount prayed. Plaintiff’s motion for new trial on general and special grounds was overruled.

The evidence, construed in favor of the verdict, showed that plaintiff had taken a right turn onto Highway 330. When he did so, he crossed over to the shoulder on defendant’s side of the road. Defendant’s wife shortly before had crested a hill approaching plaintiff on Highway 330. She testified that, when she saw plaintiff approaching in her lane, she applied her brakes, running off the pavement and onto the shoulder of her side of the road; that a hole in the pavement “jerked” her back onto the road and that she then turned back into plaintiff’s lane because “All I could think of was a head-on collision.” The impact took place in plaintiff’s lane. *Held:*

1. The general grounds are without merit as there is ample evidence to support the verdict.

2. A charge on emergency is complained of in special ground 4. Under the facts here, the charge was authorized under the principle stated in *Morrow v. Southeastern Stages,*68 Ga. App. 142 (2, 3) (22 SE2d 336), and followed recently in *Williams v. Slusser,*104 Ga. App. 412 (3) (121 SE2d 796).

3. Special ground 5 complains that the jury foreman was called back to date the verdict after the jury had been discharged. The authority of *Code*§ 110-111, allowing amendments of verdicts as to form after the jury has dispersed, is sufficient to allow the addition of the date. See, Leverett, Hall & Christopher, Ga. Procedure & Practice, 420, § 19-11.

*359Decided September 20, 1963.

*Mark Dunahoo,*for plaintiff in error.

*J. N. Rainey, H. W. Davis, Jack A. Davidson,*contra.

4. Special ground 6 complains of the failure of the court to charge, apparently without request, that certain acts constituted gross negligence. This ground is subject to a number of infirmities, one of which is the failure to specify in any way the pleadings or the evidence which would support the charge. *Hardwick v. Georgia Power Co.,*100 Ga. App. 38 (5) (110 SE2d 24); *Hodges v. Gay,*100 Ga. App. 210 (110 SE2d 570); *Beecher v. Farley,*104 Ga. App. 785 (123 SE2d 184); *Pendry v. Addison,*105 Ga. App. 673 (1) (125 SE2d 523); *Mazzola v. Swift Mfg. Co.,*108 Ga. App. 313; *Byck v. Lawton,*218 Ga. 858 (4) (131 SE2d 176). It is without merit.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Felton, C. J., and Russell, J., concur.*
Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a‐14 and 15d‐14


as Adopted Pursuant to


Section 302 of the Sarbanes‐Oxley Act of 2002


I, John Gorey, certify that:


1.I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10‐K of Foundation Building Materials, Inc.;


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 annual 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(s) 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:


a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, 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 report is being prepared;


b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and


c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and


5.The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) 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 function):


a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and


b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.


Date: March 27, 2017


/s/ John GoreyJohn GoreyChief Financial Officer
1996 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

8-9-1996

Giant Eagle Inc v. Fed Ins Co

Precedential or Non-Precedential:

Docket 95-3300

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1996

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 1996 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"Giant Eagle Inc v. Fed Ins Co" (1996). 1996 Decisions. Paper 88.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1996/88
 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

 FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT 

 __________ 

 

 95-3300 

 __________ 

 

 GIANT EAGLE, INC. 

 v. 

 FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, 

 Appellant 

 

 ___________________________________ 

 On Appeal From the United States District Court 

 For the Western District of Pennsylvania 

 D.C. No. 94-cv-00106 

 __________________________________ 

Present: Becker and McKee, Circuit Judges, and Pollack, 

 District Judge* 

 JUDGMENT 

 This cause came on to be heard on the record from the 

United States District Court for the Western District of 

Pennsylvania and was argued by counsel on March 21, 1996. 

 On consideration whereof, it is now here ordered and 

adjudged by this Court that the judgment of the said District 

Court entered March 24, 1995 which was certified by order entered 

May 18, 1995, be, and the same is hereby affirmed. Costs taxed 

against appellant. All of the above in accordance with the 

opinion of this Court. 

*Honorable Louis H. Pollak, United States District Judge for the 

Eastern District of Pennylvania, sitty by designation. 

 ATTEST: 

 Chief Deputy Clerk 
Dated: August 9, 1996
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1399 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1399

 To provide for the conveyance of certain real property at the Indiana 
Army Ammunition Plant in Charlestown, Indiana, to the State of Indiana 
                     for inclusion in a State park.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 5, 1995

 Mr. Hamilton introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on National Security

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide for the conveyance of certain real property at the Indiana 
Army Ammunition Plant in Charlestown, Indiana, to the State of Indiana 
                     for inclusion in a State park.

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

SECTION 1. LAND CONVEYANCE, INDIANA ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT, CHARLESTOWN, 
              INDIANA.

    (a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Army shall convey, 
without consideration, to the State of Indiana (in this section 
referred to as the ``State''), all right, title, and interest of the 
United States in and to a parcel of real property, including any 
improvements thereon, that consists of approximately 1125 acres at the 
inactivated Indiana Army Ammunition Plant in Charlestown, Indiana, and 
is the subject of a 25-year lease between the Secretary and the State.
    (b) Condition of Conveyance.--The conveyance required under 
subsection (a) shall be subject to the condition that the State use the 
conveyed property for recreational purposes.
    (c) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal 
description of the real property to be conveyed under subsection (a) 
shall be determined by a survey satisfactory to the Secretary. The cost 
of such survey shall be borne by the State.
    (d) Environmental Restoration.--Section 120(h) of the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 
U.S.C. 9620(h)) shall apply to the conveyance of real property under 
subsection (a).
    (e) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may require 
such additional terms and conditions in connection with the conveyance 
under subsection (a) as the Secretary considers appropriate to protect 
the interests of the United States.
                                 <all>
```