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

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7829 

To redesignate the Federal building located at 935 Pennsylvania Avenue 

Northwest in the District of Columbia as the ‘‘Federal Bureau of Investigation Building’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 29, 2020 

Mr. COHEN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To redesignate the Federal building located at 935 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest in the District of Columbia as 

the ‘‘Federal Bureau of Investigation Building’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. REDESIGNATION. 

4 The Federal building located at 935 Pennsylvania 

5 Avenue Northwest in the District of Columbia, commonly 

6 known as the J. Edgar Hoover Federal Building, shall be 

7 known and designated as the ‘‘Federal Bureau of Inves8 tigation Building’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7829 IH

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal 

4 building referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be 

5 a reference to the ‘‘Federal Bureau of Investigation Build6 ing’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
#### Joseph GORDON, trustee for Gordon Enterprises, d/b/a Parkview Point Apartments, Appellant, v. Milton M. BECK, Appellee.

No. 70-491.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Jan. 26, 1971.

Rehearing Denied March 12, 1971.

•Milton A. Fried, Miami, for appellant.

Theodore M. Trushin, Miami Beach, for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, HENDRY and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed on the authority of the following cases: Gill v. Livingston, 158 Fla. 577, 29 So.2d 631, 632; Lipkin v. Bonita Garden Apartments, Inc., Fla.App.1960, 122 So.2d 623, 624; and Arvanetes v. Gilbert, Fla.App.1962, 143 So.2d 825, 826.

Affirmed.
**Exhibit 32.1**

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

 

     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Forest Laboratories,Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission onthe date hereof (the "Report"), I, Howard Solomon, Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002, that:

            1.          TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

            2.          Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and result of operationsof the Company.

 

/s/ Howard Solomon       Howard SolomonChairman of the Board,Chief Executive Officerand DirectorNovember 9, 2007
<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

                                December 17, 2003

         In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Frank's Nursery
Crafts, Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended November 2, 2003 (the
"Report"), as filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange
Commission, the undersigned, Bruce Dale, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
does hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of such
officer's knowledge:

         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 as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the
             Report.

         IN  WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as
of the date first above written.


                                                     /s/ Bruce Dale
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     Bruce Dale
                                                     Chief Executive Officer
TP 7245E 1 of 1

AD Number: CF-2014-36

Issue Date: 17 October 2014

AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE

The following airworthiness directive (AD) may be applicable to an aircraft which our records indicate is registered in your name. ADs are issued pursuant to Canadian Aviation 

Regulation (CAR) 521 Division X. Pursuant to CAR 605.84 and the further details of CAR Standard 625, Appendix H, the continuing airworthiness of a Canadian registered aircraft is contingent upon compliance with all applicable ADs. Failure to comply with the requirements of an AD may invalidate the flight authorization of the aircraft. Alternative means of compliance shall be applied for in accordance with CAR 605.84 and the above-referenced Standard.

This AD has been issued by the Continuing Airworthiness Division (AARDG), National Aircraft Certification Branch, Transport Canada, Ottawa, telephone 613 952-4357.

Number: CF-2014-36 Effective Date: 31 October 2014

ATA: 35 Type Certificate: A-131

Subject: Oxygen – Oxygen System Flexible Hose – Incorrect Burst Pressure

Applicability: Bombardier Inc. model CL-600-2B19 aeroplanes, serial numbers 7003 and subsequent.

Compliance: Within 5800 hours air time or 44 months, whichever occurs first, from the effective date of 

this AD.

Background: Design review found that the burst pressure of the flexible hose, used to vent oxygen from 

the high-pressure relief valve of the oxygen cylinder overboard, is lower than the opening 

pressure of the high-pressure relief valve. This could cause the flexible hose to burst 

before it is able to vent the excess oxygen overboard. If an ignition source is present, the 

accumulation of oxygen in an enclosed space may result in an uncontrolled 

oxygen-fed fire.

This AD mandates the replacement of the oxygen hose assembly with a new design 

oxygen hose assembly.

Corrective Actions:

Replace the oxygen hose assembly, part number (P/N) 38026-4-0280-000, with the new 

design oxygen hose assembly, P/N 601R44045-1. Bombardier Service Bulletin (SB) 

601R-35-018, dated 21 May 2013, or later revisions approved by the Chief, Continuing 

Airworthiness, Transport Canada, provides approved instructions for replacing the oxygen 

hose assembly.

As of the effective date of this AD, it is prohibited for anyone to install oxygen hose 

assembly P/N 38026-4-0280-000.

Authorization: For the Minister of Transport, 

ORIGINAL SIGNED BY

Derek Ferguson

Chief, Continuing Airworthiness

Contact: Helen Tsai, Continuing Airworthiness, Ottawa, telephone 613-952-4357, facsimile 

613-996-9178 or e-mail AD-CN@tc.gc.ca or any Transport Canada Centre.

Pursuant to CAR 202.51 the registered owner of a Canadian aircraft shall, within seven days, notify the Minister 

in writing of any change of his or her name or address. 

For all changes to your mailing address, contact your TC Regional Aircraft Registration Office at 1-800-305-2059,

option 1 for English, 2 for Aircraft Registration and then select the appropriate region.

24-0022 (01-2005)
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8103 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8103

 To amend section 3553 of title 44, United States Code, to strengthen 
               Federal networks, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            August 25, 2020

 Mr. Green of Tennessee (for himself, Mr. Langevin, Mr. Katko, and Mr. 
  Gallagher) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                   Committee on Oversight and Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend section 3553 of title 44, United States Code, to strengthen 
               Federal networks, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Protecting Federal Networks Act''.

SEC. 2. STRENGTHENING FEDERAL NETWORKS.

    (a) Authority.--Section 3553(b) of title 44, United States Code, is 
amended--
            (1) in paragraph (6)(D), by striking ``; and'' at the end 
        and inserting a semicolon;
            (2) by redesignating paragraph (7) as paragraph (8); and
            (3) by inserting after paragraph (6) the following new 
        paragraph:
            ``(7) hunting for and identifying, with or without advance 
        notice, threats and vulnerabilities within Federal information 
        systems; and''.
    (b) Binding Operational Directive.--Not later than 1 year after the 
date of the enactment of this section, the Secretary of Homeland 
Security shall issue a binding operational directive pursuant to 
subsection (b)(2) of section 3553 of title 44, United States Code, to 
implement paragraph (7) of section 3553(b) of title 44, United States 
Code, as added by subsection (a).
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 32.3**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned certifiesthat this periodic report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information containedin the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the issuer.

Date:                    February 9, 2007
|        | James W. Thompson              |   |
|--------|--------------------------------|--------|
|   | James W. Thompson              |   |
|   | Acting Chief Financial Officer |   |

 

 

----
January 2 9 , 2010

MEMORANDUM TO: Air Docket EP A - HQ - OAR- 2005 - 0161 SUBJECT: FAPRI - CARD Lifecycle GHG Analysis Results This memorandum accompanies a spreadsheet on the docket. The attached spreadsheet includes EPA’s calculations to convert the raw FAPRI
- CARD results data into differences between scenarios to determine biofuel
- induced GHG emissions generated b y international agriculture.
Talking Trash at the FTC: Recyclable Claims 

and the Green Guides AN FTC WORKSHOP 

May 23, 2023 

7:45-8:30 am 0BRegistration 

Enter at 7th and D Streets, SW. Proceed through airport-style security. 

8:30-8:50 am 1BOpening Remarks and Welcome 

James Kohm, Associate Director, Division of Enforcement, Bureau of Consumer 

Protection, FTC 

8:50-10:05 am 2BPanel 1: Current State of Recycling Market and Claims 

Moderators: 

Julia Solomon Ensor and Hampton Newsome, Attorneys, Division of 

Enforcement, Bureau of Consumer Protection, FTC 

Panelists: 

Kate Bailey, Chief Policy Officer, Association of Plastic Recyclers 

Anne Germain, Chief Operating Officer and Senior Vice President of Regulatory 

Affairs, National Waste & Recycling Association 

Adam Riedel, Manager, Environmental Management Office, Arlington VA 

County Government 

Kaelah Smith, Assistant Attorney General, State of Connecticut 

Anthony Tusino, Senior Program Officer for Plastic Policy Advocacy, WWF 

Eric Unis, Senior Attorney, National Advertising Division of BBB National 

Programs 

10:05-10:15 am 3BBreak 
 

 

10:15-11:05 am Panel 2: Consumer Perception of Recycling Claims 

Moderators: 

Julia Solomon Ensor and Hampton Newsome, Attorneys, Division of 

Enforcement, Bureau of Consumer Protection, FTC 

Panelists: 

Sarah Dearman, Chief Innovation Officer, The Recycling Partnership 

Karen Hagerman, Director, How2Recycle, GreenBlue 

Brian Hawkinson, Executive Director, Recovered Fiber, American Forest & 

Paper Association (AF&PA) 

Kim Holmes, Owner and Principal Consultant, 4R Sustainability, and research 

consultant for the Recycled Material Standard 

Bonnie Patten, Executive Director, Truth in Advertising (TINA.org) 

11:05-11:15 am Break 

11:15 am- Panel 3: Future of the Green Guides 12:30 pm Moderators: 

Julia Solomon Ensor and Hampton Newsome, Attorneys, Division of 

Enforcement, Bureau of Consumer Protection, FTC 

Panelists: 

Peter Blair, Policy Director, Just Zero 

Jeffrey A. Greenbaum, Managing Partner, Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz 

Patrick Krieger, Vice President, Sustainability, Plastics Industry Association 

Raissa Lerner, Deputy Attorney General, State of California 

Peter DePasquale, Vice President of Government Affairs, Keurig Dr Pepper 

Quinta Warren, Associate Director of Sustainability Policy, Consumer Reports 

12:30-12:45 pm 4BClosing Remarks and Invitation to Comment 

James Kohm, Associate Director, Division of Enforcement, Bureau of Consumer 

Protection, FTC
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF EARNINGS FOR THE MONTHS
ENDED MARCH 27, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-25-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-27-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-27-1998
<CASH>                                         141,476
<SECURITIES>                                    83,074
<RECEIVABLES>                                  779,760
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    399,874
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,476,975
<PP&E>                                       1,144,982
<DEPRECIATION>                                 322,148
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,295,471
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,393,967
<BONDS>                                        834,928
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        40,746
<OTHER-SE>                                     579,715
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,295,471
<SALES>                                      1,027,961
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,037,754
<CGS>                                          991,939
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  991,939
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              14,005
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 27,533
<INCOME-TAX>                                    10,147
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             17,386
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    17,386
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.43
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.43
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 11


               SHELLS SEAFOOD RESTAURANTS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                       COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
                     YEAR (52 WEEKS) ENDED JANUARY 2, 2000


Net income (loss) for the computation of per share earnings        $ (2,714,188)

Basic net income (loss) per share of common stock                  $      (0.61)
                                                                   ============

Diluted net income (loss) per share of common stock                $      (0.61)
                                                                   ============

Weighted average common stock issued and outstanding                  4,454,015

Options and warrants granted:

                              Number of        Exercise Price
             Date         Exercisable Shares     Per Share
Various                        437,043        $2.88 to $11.00             1,753
             June 30, 1995     350,000        $          3.15            52,170
             June 30, 1995      75,000        $          3.75            40,759
        September 19, 1995     200,000        $          3.50            10,901
          February 1, 1996     150,000        $          3.50                --
              May 13, 1996     210,000        $          6.00                --
                                                                   ------------
                                                                      4,559,598
                                                                   ============

*  Diluted net income (loss) per common share is computed by dividing net income
   by the weighted average number of shares of common stock.  The common stock
   equivalents are excluded from the fully diluted calculation as they are
   anti-dilutive.
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 45737

STATE OF IDAHO

,

Plaintiff

- Respondent

,

v.

NATHAN RAY TORRES

,

Defendant

- Appellant

. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Filed: November 8, 2018

Karel A. Lehrman, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Twin

Falls County. Hon. Ned C. Williamson , District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of five years, with a minimum period of confinement of three years, for battery on a police/peace officer or sheriff

, affirmed

.

Eric D. Fredericksen , State Appellate Public Defender; Justin M. Curtis , Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming , Dep uty Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

________________________________________________

Before GUTIERREZ, Judge; HUSKEY, Judge; and LORELLO, Judge

________________________________________________

PER CURIAM

Nathan Ray Torres pled guilty to battery on a police/peace officer or sheriff . I.C. § 19

-

2513 . The district court sentenced Torres to a unified term of five years, with a minimum period

of confinement of three years

. Torres appeals, arguing that his sentence is excessive.

Sentencing is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Both our standard of review and the

factors to be considered in evaluating th e reasonableness of the sentence are well established and

need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez , 121 Idaho 114, 117

- 18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014

-2 15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez , 106 Idaho 447, 449

- 51, 680 P.2d 869, 871

- 73 (Ct. App.

1984); State v. Toohill , 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing

the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver , 144 Idaho

722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record

in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Torres ’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________

No. 96-3538MN

_____________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the 

v. * District of Minnesota.

*

Lorenzo Martin Devine, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

_____________

 Submitted: March 14, 1997

 Filed: March 26, 1997

_____________

Before McMILLIAN, FAGG, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

_____________

PER CURIAM.

Lorenzo Martin Devine appeals the district court’s order

revoking Devine’s supervised release and imposing a term of

imprisonment followed by a period of supervised release. In a

brief filed under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),

counsel contends Devine’s revocation hearing was untimely under

Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1(a)(2). The record does not

support counsel’s contention, see United States v. Blunt, 680 F.2d

1216, 1219 (8th Cir. 1982), and Devine suffered no prejudice from

the delay before his federal revocation hearing, see United States

v. Chaklader, 987 F.2d 75, 76-77 (1st Cir. 1993) (per curiam); cf.

United States v. Smith, 80 F.3d 1188, 1191-92 (7th Cir. 1996).

Counsel also contends the district court lacked authority to impose

a punishment that combined imprisonment and supervised release on
-2-

revocation of Devine’s original supervised release term; however,

this argument is foreclosed by our decision in United States v. 
-3-

Love, 19 F.3d 415, 416 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 434

(1994). Based on our review of the record, we find no nonfrivolous

issue for appeal. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988). We

thus affirm the district court.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

June 23, 2010 

0616 

Order 

 

June 23, 2010 

139144(74) 

SHARON BROOKS, Personal Representative 

of the Estate of Dominique Wade, Deceased, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 139144 

 COA: 277469 

Oakland CC: 2005-065114-NO 

STARR COMMONWEALTH. 

 Defendant/Cross- 

 Defendant-Appellant, 

and 

BRIDGEWAY SERVICES, L.L.C., 

 Defendant/Cross- 

 Plaintiff-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s May 7, 2010 

order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously. 

 KELLY, C.J., and CAVANAGH and HATHAWAY, JJ., would grant reconsideration.