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

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 782 

To increase the rates of pay under the statutory pay systems and for prevailing rate employees by 1.9 percent, to provide a hardship bonus 

for Federal employees affected by the Government shutdown beginning 

on December 22, 2018, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 24, 2019 

Mr. RICHMOND introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Oversight and Reform 

A BILL 

To increase the rates of pay under the statutory pay systems 

and for prevailing rate employees by 1.9 percent, to 

provide a hardship bonus for Federal employees affected 

by the Government shutdown beginning on December 

22, 2018, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Federal Employees 

5 Compensation Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 782 IH

1 SEC. 2. ADJUSTMENTS TO PAY FOR 2019. 

2 (a) STATUTORY PAY SYSTEMS.—For calendar year 

3 2019, the percentage adjustment under section 5303 of 

4 title 5, United States Code, in the rates of basic pay under 

5 the statutory pay systems (as defined in section 5302 of 

6 title 5, United States Code) shall be 1.9 percent. 

7 (b) PREVAILING RATE EMPLOYEES.—Notwith8 standing the wage survey requirements under section 

9 5343(b) of title 5, United States Code, for fiscal year 

10 2019, the rates of basic pay (as in effect on the last day 

11 of fiscal year 2017 under section 5343(a) of such title) 

12 for prevailing rate employees in each wage area and the 

13 rates of basic pay under sections 5348 and 5349 of such 

14 title shall be increased by 1.9 percent. 

15 (c) ADJUSTMENT TO LOCALITY PAY.—For calendar 

16 year 2019, the percentage adjustment under section 5304 

17 of title 5, United States Code, shall be an increase of 1.9 

18 percent. 

19 (d) APPLICATION.—Subsections (a), (b), and (c) shall 

20 be deemed to have taken effect on January 1, 2019. 

21 SEC. 3. HARDSHIP BONUS FOR FEDERAL EMPLOYEES FOR 

22 DECEMBER 22, 2018, SHUTDOWN. 

23 (a) IN GENERAL.—Any employee of the United 

24 States Government that is furloughed or excepted from 

25 furlough and working without pay during the lapse in apVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:40 Feb 02, 2019 Jkt 089200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H782.IH H782

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•HR 782 IH

1 propriations beginning on or about December 22, 2018, 

2 shall receive a one-time bonus of $500. 

3 (b) APPLICATION.—A bonus under subsection (a)— 

4 (1) shall be paid on the same date that the em5 ployee receives pay pursuant to section 1341(c) of 

6 title 31, United States Code; 

7 (2) shall be subject to any applicable limitation 

8 on total aggregate pay, including section 5307 of 

9 title 5, United States Code; and 

10 (3) is not part of the basic pay of an employee 

11 for any purpose. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
259 La. 682

#### DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS of the State of Louisiana v. Bennie CAPONE d/b/a Capone Cleaners.

No. 51558.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Aug. 17, 1971.

In re: Bennie Capone, d/b/a Capone Cleaners, applying for certiorari, or writ of review. 248 So.2d 62.

Writ denied. The judgment is not final.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

KENNETH J. SCHIRO, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

STEPHEN CLARK, Sgt.; et al., 

Defendants-Appellees. 

No. 15-15266 

D.C. No. 3:10-cv-00203-RCJ-VPC 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Nevada

Robert Clive Jones, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 11, 2017**

Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Nevada state prisoner Kenneth J. Schiro appeals pro se from the district 

court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional 

claims, including a due process violation in connection with a disciplinary hearing. 

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal on 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

APR 21 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
 2 15-15266 

the basis of collateral estoppel or issue preclusion. Garity v. APWU Nat’l Labor 

Org., 828 F.3d 848, 854 (9th Cir. 2016). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Schiro’s due process claim against 

defendant Clark because Schiro is collaterally estopped from relitigating issues 

relating to his April 7, 2008 disciplinary hearing that the Nevada courts resolved. 

See Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90, 97-98 (1980) (federal claim collaterally 

estopped by prior state court litigation); Arduini v. Hart, 774 F.3d 622, 629 (9th 

Cir. 2014) (elements of issue preclusion under Nevada law).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Schiro’s motion to 

appoint counsel because Schiro did not demonstrate exceptional circumstances. 

See Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991) (standard of review and 

requirements for appointment of counsel).

We do not consider the dismissal of Schiro’s other claims because Schiro 

does not raise any arguments about those claims in his opening brief. See Smith v. 

Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir. 1999) (“[A]rguments not raised by a party in 

its opening brief are deemed waived.”).

We lack jurisdiction to consider the district court’s post-judgment order 

denying Schiro’s Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) motion because Schiro 
 3 15-15266 

failed to file an amended or separate notice of appeal. See Whitaker v. Garcetti, 

486 F.3d 572, 585 (9th Cir. 2007) (appellant generally must file a separate notice 

of appeal or amend a previously filed notice of appeal to secure review of a postjudgment order).

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 31.1**CERTIFICATIONS**I, Terry L. Collins, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Argon ST, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations, and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  b. Designed such internal control over financial reporting or caused such internalcontrol over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to providereasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and thepreparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generallyaccepted accounting principles;  c. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  d. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s third fiscal quarter that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.Date:August 10, 2007       /s/ Terry L. Collins   Terry L. Collins   Chief Executive Officer   
24
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-2068

L. RUTHER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

BARRY GASH,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, 

District Judge. (1:16-cv-01044-LO-MSN)

Submitted: January 31, 2017 Decided: February 2, 2017

Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

L. Ruther, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

L. Ruther appeals the district court’s order summarily

dismissing his civil action. We have reviewed the record and 

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed 

in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated 

by the district court. Ruther v. Gash, No. 1:16-cv-01044-LO-MSN

(E.D. Va. filed Aug. 19, 2016; entered Aug. 22, 2016). We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
FTC Contact Lens Study

James C. Cooper
Background

• FTC had long history of promoting 

competition in professional services

• OPP investigating barriers to e-commerce

• FCLCA required that the FTC “undertake a 

study to examine the strength of competition 

in the sale of prescription contact lenses.”
Online-Offline Price Difference

Regression controlling for mix of lenses finds 

$15.48 difference, 

but same intrachannel patterns
Private Label and 

Limited Distribution Lenses

• Limited distribution and private label lenses 

widely available online and offline

• No price difference between private label and 

brand name equivalent ($76.28 vs. $77.99)

• No evidence of supra competitive pricing for 

ProClear
2007 Follow-up finds No 

systematic change in gap 

between online and offline 

prices since Rx release had 

gone into effect

No evidence of more 

intense offline competition 

as measured by price 

dispersion
Thank You!
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection withthe Annual Report of Sauer-Danfoss Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Kfor the period ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Karl J. Schmidt,Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)   The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)   The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

| Dated: March 12, 2007 | /s/ Karl J. Schmidt                                  |
|----------------------------|------------------------------------------------------|
|                       | Karl J. Schmidt                                      |
|                       | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7604 

To direct the Administrator of General Services to ensure that the construction and acquisition of public buildings in the United States adheres 

to the guiding principles for Federal architecture, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 13, 2020 

Ms. TITUS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To direct the Administrator of General Services to ensure 

that the construction and acquisition of public buildings 

in the United States adheres to the guiding principles 

for Federal architecture, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Democracy in Design 

5 Act’’. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7604 IH

1 SEC. 2. CONTINUING INVESTIGATION AND SURVEY OF PUB2 LIC BUILDINGS. 

3 Section 3303 of title 40, United States Code, is 

4 amended by adding at the end the following: 

5 ‘‘(e) GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR FEDERAL ARCHITEC6 TURE.—The Administrator shall ensure that the construc7 tion and acquisition of public buildings in the United 

8 States adheres to the principles described in the report 

9 of the Ad Hoc Committee on Federal Office Space, issued 

10 June 1, 1962, and titled ‘Guiding Principles for Federal 

11 Architecture’.’’. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with BILLS
Dolan Chemical Laboratory

4001 Bixby Road

Groveport, OH 43125

T: 614-836-4221, Audinet 210-4221

F: 614-836-4168, Audinet 210-4168

http://aepenv/labs

Water Analysis

Form REP-703

Rev. 1, 11/2013

Location: Mountaineer Plant Report Date: 12/31/2013

Sample Number: 135092-001 Date Collected: 12/18/2013 Date Received: 12/20/2013

Trip Blank 

Parameter Result Units RL MDL Analysis By Analysis Date/Time Method

Data 

Qual

Mercury, Hg 0.2 ng/L J 0.5 0.2 JAB 12/26/2013 EPA 1631E-2002

Sample Number: 135092-002 Date Collected: 12/18/2013 Date Received: 12/20/2013

Field Blank 

Parameter Result Units RL MDL Analysis By Analysis Date/Time Method

Data 

Qual

Mercury, Hg < 0.2 ng/L U 0.5 0.2 JAB 12/26/2013 EPA 1631E-2002

Sample Number: 135092-003 Date Collected: 12/18/2013 Date Received: 12/20/2013

Plant Outfall #001 

Parameter Result Units RL MDL Analysis By Analysis Date/Time Method

Data 

Qual

Mercury, Hg 15.9 ng/L 2 0.8 JAB 12/26/2013 EPA 1631E-2002

Sample Number: 135092-004 Date Collected: 12/20/2013 Date Received: 12/20/2013

Plant Outfall #001 

Parameter Result Units RL MDL Analysis By Analysis Date/Time Method

Data 

Qual

Mercury, Hg 15.1 ng/L 2 0.8 JAB 12/26/2013 EPA 1631E-2002

Sample Number: 135092-005 Date Collected: 12/18/2013 Date Received: 12/20/2013

CPS Effluent 

Parameter Result Units RL MDL Analysis By Analysis Date/Time Method

Data 

Qual

Mercury, Hg 141 ng/L 20 8 JAB 12/26/2013 EPA 1631E-2002

Sample Number: 135092-006 Date Collected: 12/18/2013 Date Received: 12/20/2013

Bioreactor Effluent 

Parameter Result Units RL MDL Analysis By Analysis Date/Time Method

Data 

Qual

Mercury, Hg 6.0 ng/L 2 0.8 JAB 12/26/2013 EPA 1631E-2002

Mountaineer Plant, 135092 Page 1 of 2
Location: Mountaineer Plant Report Date: 12/31/2013

THIS TEST REPORT RELATES ONLY TO THE ITEMS TESTED AND SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED EXCEPT IN FULL WITHOUT WRITTEN 

APPROVAL OF THE LABORATORY. ALL TEST RESULTS MEET ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ACCREDITING AUTHORITY, 

UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.

U: Analyte was analyzed and not detected at or above adjusted Method Detection Limit

J: Analyte was positively identified, though the quantitation was below Reporting Limit.

Brian Snyder, Chemist II

Email bssnyder@aep.com Tel. 614-836-4224

Fax 614-836-4168 Audinet 210-4224

Mountaineer Plant, 135092 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 99.1
                                                     ------------


                          Certification
    Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18,
                       United States Code)

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18,
United States Code) (the "Act"), each of the undersigned officers
of Novo Networks, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"),
does hereby certify that:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September
30, 2002 (the "Periodic Report") of the Company fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 780(d)) and information
contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company.



/s/  BARRETT N. WISSMAN
-------------------------------------
Barrett N. Wissman
President and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)



/s/  SUSIE C. HOLLIDAY
------------------------------------
Susie C. Holliday
Senior Vice President
(Principal Accounting Officer)


Dated:  November 14, 2002



The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to
Section 906 of the Act and is not being filed as part of the
Periodic Report or as a separate disclosure document.
EXHIBIT 31.1

Certification

I,
Sven Ruder, certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Sauer-Danfoss 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 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f))
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 registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



Date: March 4, 2010

/s/ SVEN RUDER Sven Ruder President and Chief Executive Officer


---



QuickLinks
258 La. 209

#### George Frank DESPINO v. The TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY et al.

No. 51214.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 24, 1971.

In re: George Frank Despino applying for certiorari or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of East Baton Rouge. 243 So.2d 278.

Writ refused. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal, there is no error of law in its judgment.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA WESTERN DISTRICT

**In the Matter of**

**SEBASTIAN M. RAINONE**

**PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT :**  **: :**  **: :**  **: :**  **: No. 1164 Disciplinary Docket No. 3** 

**No. 60 DB 2004 Attorney Registration No.**  **16046 (Philadelphia)** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 17 th**  **day of March, 2016, the Petition for Reinstatement i s**  **denied. Petitioner is directed to pay the expenses incurred by**  **the Board in the investigation and processing of the Petition for Reinst**  **atement. See**  **Pa.R.D.E. 218(f).**
Order entered August 1, 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 14

- 00146

- CR

ESSIE D. HOPKINS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F13

- 55764

- U



### O RDER

The Court ORDERS the trial court to make findings of fact regarding whether appellant

has been deprived of the reporter’s record because of ineffective counsel, indigence, or for any

other reason.

 The trial court shall first determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal. If the trial court determines that appellant does not desire to prosecute the appeal, it shall make a finding to that effect.

 If the trial court determines that appellant desires to prosecute t he appeal, it shall next determine whether appellant is indigent and entitled to proceed without payment of costs for the reporter’s record. If appellant is entitled to proceed without payment of costs, the trial court shall make a finding to that effect. Moreover, if appellant is indigent, the trial

court is ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective representation, which may include appointment of new counsel. If the trial court finds appellant is not indigent, it shall deter mine whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeal. The trial court shall next determine: (1) the name and address of each court reporter who

recorded the proceedings in this cause; (2) the court reporter’s explanation for the delay in filing the rep orter’s record; and (3) the earliest date by which the reporter’s record can

be filed.

We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record, containing the written findings of fact,

any supporting documentation, and any orders, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date

of this order.

The appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with this order. The appeal

shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are received,

whichever is earlier.

/s/ LANA MYERS

JUSTICE