alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"2019-2040: Koninklijke Philips N.V. v. Iancu - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"zRejaK8C7Z\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/11-02-2020-2019-2040-koninklijke-philips-nv-v-iancu-audio-uploaded\/\">2019-2040: Koninklijke Philips N.V. v. Iancu<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/11-02-2020-2019-2040-koninklijke-philips-nv-v-iancu-audio-uploaded\/embed\/#?secret=zRejaK8C7Z\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“2019-2040: Koninklijke Philips N.V. v. Iancu” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"zRejaK8C7Z\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\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<\/script>\n","description":"Oral argument audio posted: Koninklijke Philips N.V. v. Iancu (mp3) Appeal Number: 2019-2040 To listen to more oral argument recordings, follow this link: Listen To Oral Arguments."}
§ 50-203.13 Requests for exceptions and exemptions. ( a ) Request for the exception or exemption of a contract or class of contracts from the inclusion or application of one or more of those stipulations required by § 50-201.1 of this chapter must be made by the head of a contracting agency or department and shall be accompanied with a finding by him setting forth reasons why such inclusion or application will seriously impair the conduct of Government business.
( b ) Request for the exception or exemption of a stipulation respecting minimum rates of pay and maximum hours of labor contained in an existing contract must be made jointly by the head of a contracting agency and the contractor and shall be accompanied with a joint finding by them setting forth reasons why such exception or exemption is desired.
( c ) All requests for exceptions or exemptions which relate solely to safety and health standards shall be transmitted directly to the Bureau of Labor Standards, WSA, Department of Labor. All other requests for exceptions or exemptions shall be transmitted to the Office of Government Contracts Wage Standards, WSA, of the Department of Labor.
[12 FR 446, Jan. 22, 1947. Redesignated at 24 FR 10952, Dec. 30, 1959, and amended at 36 FR 289, Jan. 8, 1971]
§ 51.901 Purpose and scope of transitional access service pricing rules. ( a ) The purpose of this section is to establish rules governing the transition of intercarrier compensation from a calling-party's-network pays system to a default bill-and-keep methodology. Following the transition, the exchange of traffic between and among service providers will, by default, be governed by bill-and-keep arrangements.
( b ) Effective December 29, 2011, the provisions of this subpart apply to reciprocal compensation for telecommunications traffic exchanged between telecommunications providers that is interstate or intrastate exchange access, information access, or exchange services for such access, other than special access.
Note to § 51.901 :
See FCC 11-161, figure 9 (chart identifying steps in the transition).
§ 64.635 Procedures where the Fund has already reimbursed the provider. ( a ) The procedures in this section shall only apply after an iTRS user or iTRS provider has complained to or notified the Commission that an unauthorized change, as defined by § 64.601(a) of this part, has occurred, and the Fund has reimbursed the allegedly unauthorized default provider for minutes of service provided to the iTRS user.
( b ) If the Commission determines that an unauthorized change, as defined by § 64.601(a) of this part, has occurred, it shall direct the unauthorized default provider to remit to the Fund an amount equal to 100% of all payments the unauthorized default provider received from the Fund for minutes attributable to the iTRS user after the unauthorized change occurred. The remedies provided in this section are in addition to any other remedies available by law.
[78 FR 40609, July 5, 2013]
EXHIBIT 32.1
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                                   AS ADDED BY
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


    In connection with the Quarterly Report of Greater Atlantic Financial Corp.
(the "company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2008 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Carroll E. Amos, President and Chief Executive Officer of the company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss. 1350, as added by ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

A.   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

B.   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.



                                     By: /s/ Carroll E. Amos
                                     -----------------------
                                     Carroll E. Amos
                                     President and Chief Executive Officer


                                     Date: August 13, 2008
----

            COUNCIL DECISION 2005/426/CFSP

of 6 June 2005         

concerning the implementation of Common Position 2004/694/CFSP on further measures in support of the effective implementation of the mandate of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to Common Position 2004/694/CFSP (1) and in particular Article 2 thereof, in conjunction with the second indent of Article 23(2) of the Treaty on European Union,

Whereas:

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The list of persons set out in the Annex to Common Position 2004/694/CFSP shall be replaced by the text set out in the Annex to this Decision.

Article 2

This Decision shall take effect on the date of its adoption.

Article 3

This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Luxembourg, 6 June 2005.

For the Council

The President

J. KRECKÉ            

----

(1)OJ L 315, 14.10.2004, p. 52. Common Position as last amended by Decision 2005/316/CFSP (OJ L 100, 20.4.2005, p. 54).

----

ANNEX

                     ‘ANNEX

List of persons referred to in Article 1

----
###### Editorial Note on Part 1

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

#### § 1.1309 Application amendments.

Applicants are permitted to amend their applications to reduce, minimize, or eliminate potential environmental problems. Amendments shall be made electronically. As a routine matter, an applicant will be permitted to amend its application within thirty (30) days after the Commission or the Bureau informs the applicant that the proposal will have a significant impact upon the quality of the human environment (*see* § 1.1308(c)). The period of thirty (30) days may be extended upon a showing of good cause.

[85 FR 85530, Dec. 29, 2020]
No. 11M112.

#### Lomax *v.*Wal-Mart Stores East et al.

Motion to direct the Clerk to file petition for writ of certiorari out of time denied.
No. 11-5303.

#### Torres-Juarez *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 158 (Wednesday, August 16, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Page 47247]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-6937]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree Pursuant to Clean Water Act

    Notice is hereby given that on August 2, 2006, a proposed consent 
decree in United States, et al. v. City of Brockton, Massachusetts, 
Civil Action No. 06-11334-NMG, was lodged with the United States 
District Court for the District of Massachusetts.
    The proposed consent decree will settle the United States' and 
Commonwealth of Massachusetts' claims for violations of the Clean Water 
Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251, et seq., and the Massachusetts Clean Waters Act, 
Mass. Gen. Laws c. 21, Sec. Sec.  26, et seq., related to the City's 
alleged failure to comply with its discharge permit relating to the 
City's publically-owned treatment works (POTW). Pursuant to the 
proposed consent decree, the City will pay $120,000 as civil penalty 
for such violations, perform three supplemental environmental projects 
at a cost of $180,000, as well as institute necessary improvements at 
the POTW at an estimated cost of $95 million.
    The Department of Justice will receive for a period of thirty (30) 
days from the date of this publication comments relating to the 
proposed consent decree. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant 
Attorney General of the Environment and Natural Resources Division, 
Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20530, and should refer to United 
States, et al., v. City of Brockton, Massachusetts, Civil Action No. 
06-11334-NMG, D.J. Ref. 90-5-1-1-08161.
    The proposed consent decree may also be examined at the Office of 
the United States Attorney, District of Massachusetts, 1550 Main 
Street, U.S. Courthouse, Room 310, Springfield, MA. During the public 
comment period, the proposed consent decree may also be examined on the 
following Department of Justice Web site, http://www.usdoj.gov/enrd/Consent_Decrees.html. A copy of the proposed consent decree may also 
be obtained by mail from the Consent Decree Library, P.O. Box 7611, 
U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20044-7611 or by faxing or 
e-mailing a request to Tonia Fleetwood (<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#8afee5e4e3eba4ece6efeffefde5e5eecafff9eee5e0a4ede5fc"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="dfabb0b1b6bef1b9b3babaaba8b0b0bb9faaacbbb0b5f1b8b0a9">[email protected]</span></a>), fax 
no. (202) 514-0097, phone confirmation number (202) 514-1547. If 
requesting a copy of the proposed consent decree, please so note and 
enclose a check in the amount of $12.00 (25 cents per page reproduction 
cost) payable to the U.S. Treasury.

Ronald Gluck,
Assistant Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and 
Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 06-6937 Filed 8-15-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-15-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4647

AN ACT

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey to the

City of Imperial Beach, California, approximately 1 acre

of land in the Tijuana Slough National Wildlife Refuge.

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

3 SECTION 1. CONVEYANCE OF LAND IN TIJUANA SLOUGH

4 NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE.

5 (a) REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary of the Interior

6 shall expeditiously convey to the City of Imperial Beach,

7 California, without compensation, all right, title, and in8 terest of the United States in and to approximately 1 acre

9 of land in the Tijuana Slough National Wildlife Refuge,
2

HR 4647 EH

1 as depicted on a United States Fish and Wildlife Service

2 map entitled ‘‘T-ball Field, Tijuana Slough National Wild3 life Refuge’’, dated June 1994, for use as a public rec4 reational area.

5 (b) REVERSIONARY INTEREST IN THE UNITED

6 STATES.—Upon any date on which any of the land in

7 which right, title, and interest is conveyed under sub8 section (a) ceases to be used by the City of Imperial

9 Beach, California, for public recreational purposes—

10 (1) all such right, title, and interest shall revert

11 to the Government of the United States; and

12 (2) such land shall be reincorporated into the

13 Tijuana Slough National Wildlife Refuge.

Passed the House of Representatives July 12, 1994.

Attest:

Clerk.

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4647

AN ACT

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey to

tional Wildlife Refuge.mately 1 acre of land in the Tijuana Slough Nathe City of Imperial Beach, California, approxi-
184P15

#### State v. Jose Edis Carranza

1. Defs *Pro Se*Motion for Notice of Appeal (COAP15-318)

1. Dismissed *ex mero motu*

2. Def’s *Pro Se*Motion for PDR

2. Dismissed

3. Def’s *Pro Se*Petition for *Writ of Certiorari to*Review Order of COA

3. Dismissed
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

CONTENT SQUARE ISRAEL LTD., fka Clicktale 

Ltd., 

Appellant

v.

DECIBEL INSIGHT, LTD., DECIBEL INSIGHT, 

INC., 

Appellees

______________________

2022-2205, 2022-2206

______________________

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2021-

00363, IPR2021-00464.

______________________

ON MOTION

______________________

O R D E R

The parties submit a “Joint Stipulation to Voluntarily 

Dismiss Appeals Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 42(b),” which 

the court treats as a joint motion to dismiss these appeals.

Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED THAT: 

Case: 22-2205 Document: 21 Page: 1 Filed: 02/23/2023
2 CONTENT SQUARE ISRAEL LTD. V. DECIBEL INSIGHT, LTD.

(1) The motion is granted. The appeals are dismissed.

(2) Each side shall bear their own costs.

FOR THE COURT

February 23, 2023

Date /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

Peter R. Marksteiner 

Clerk of Court

ISSUED AS A MANDATE: February 23, 2023

Case: 22-2205 Document: 21 Page: 2 Filed: 02/23/2023
Argued May 3,

decided May 25;

rehearing denied July 20, 1909.

#### HART *v.*MALHEUR COUNTY COURT.

[101 Pac. 600.]

From Malheur: George E. Davis, Judge.

Petition by J. H. Hart for writ of review against B. C. Richardson and others, commissioners of Malheur *271County, constituting the county court. From an order of the circuit court dismissing the writ, petitioner appeals.

Affirmed.

For appellant there was a brief and an oral argument by *Mr. George W. Hayes.*

For respondent there was a brief over the name of *Mr. John W. McCulloch,*District Attorney, with an oral argument by *Mr. Andrew M. Crawford,*Attorney General.

Mr. Justice McBride

delivered the opinion of the court.

This case was submitted at the same time with the case of *Garrison*v. *Malheur County Court*(heretofore decided by this court), *supra;*the pleadings and facts being the same in both cases. Folio wing „ that case and the case of *Raper*v. *Dunn,*53 Or. 203 (99 Pac. 889), the judgment of the court below will be affirmed.

Affirmed: Rehearing Denied.
EXHIBIT 32.2



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 Annual Report of Concierge Technologies, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the Report), I, Allen E. Kahn, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, 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)

Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Date:  October 14, 2008

| |     |                                      
| | --- | -------------------------------------
| | By: | /s/ ALLEN E. KAHN                    
| |     | Allen E. Kahn
Chief Financial Officer



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Concierge Technologies, Inc. and will be retained by Concierge Technologies, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
No. 11-5844.

#### Pryce *v.*New Jersey.

Super. Ct. N. J., App. Div. Certiorari denied.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"22-2165: ALTERNATIVE PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGIES HOLDINGS CORP. v. GRIMES [ORDER], Nonprecedential - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"0sBaCvSyIp\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/12-14-2022-22-2165-alternative-petroleum-technologies-holdings-corp-v-grimes-order-22-2165-order-12-14-2022_2047660\/\">22-2165: ALTERNATIVE PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGIES HOLDINGS CORP. v. GRIMES [ORDER], Nonprecedential<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/12-14-2022-22-2165-alternative-petroleum-technologies-holdings-corp-v-grimes-order-22-2165-order-12-14-2022_2047660\/embed\/#?secret=0sBaCvSyIp\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“22-2165: ALTERNATIVE PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGIES HOLDINGS CORP. v. GRIMES [ORDER], Nonprecedential” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"0sBaCvSyIp\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\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<\/script>\n","description":"ORDER Posted: ALTERNATIVE PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGIES HOLDINGS CORP. v. GRIMES [ORDER](pdf) Appeal Number: 22-2165 Origin: DCT Nonprecedential To see more opinions and orders, follow this link: Opinions and Orders."}
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM (A) THE
COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATION
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH (B) FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          46,143
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           3,467
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                93,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                66,067
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     63,716
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                      2,080,465
<ALLOWANCE>                                     28,077
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,505,117
<DEPOSITS>                                   2,187,412
<SHORT-TERM>                                    93,640
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             31,718
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      1,500
<COMMON>                                        20,646
<OTHER-SE>                                     141,451
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               2,505,117
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                159,495
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               13,298
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               172,793
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              81,157
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              89,609
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           83,184
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   14,261
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                               1,040
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                142,678
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (17,336)
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     (17,336)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (12,421)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (1.34)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (1.34)
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    8.57
<LOANS-NON>                                     36,602
<LOANS-PAST>                                     1,232
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                22,023
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    4,394
<RECOVERIES>                                       490
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               28,077
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            28,077
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>