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

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 435

Directing the Committee on House Administration to make public all transcripts of proceedings and documents related to the investigation of

the House Administration Committee Task Force to Investigate the

Operation and Management of the House Post Office.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 24, 1994

Mr. KLUG (for himself, Mr. BOEHNER, and Mr. ROBERTS) submitted the

following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Rules

RESOLUTION

Directing the Committee on House Administration to make

public all transcripts of proceedings and documents related to the investigation of the House Administration Committee Task Force to Investigate the Operation and Management of the House Post Office.

Whereas the Committee on House Administration ordered reported on July 22, 1992, the findings of the Committee

Task Force to Investigate the Operation and Management of the House Post Office;

Whereas the House has voted three times to not make public

all Task Force transcripts and documents regarding the

internal Committee on House Administration investigation in light of the then-ongoing investigative activities by

the Department of Justice;
2

•HRES 435 IH

Whereas the Department of Justice has now completed the

investigatory phase of its House Post Office investigation; and

Whereas matters have been raised which impugn the integrity

of the proceedings of the House of Representatives: Now,

therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the Committee on House Administra2 tion is directed to make public all transcripts of proceed3 ings and documents related to the investigation of the

4 House Administration Committee Task Force to Inves5 tigate the Operation and Management of the House Post

6 Office leading to its final report.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-28-1997             SEP-28-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997             MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                               0                 109,799
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0               1,598,263
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                  32,534
<INVENTORY>                                          0               3,326,163
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0               5,137,380
<PP&E>                                               0               3,924,527
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0               2,703,704
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0               6,545,705
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0               1,075,208
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                  20,493
<OTHER-SE>                                           0               3,481,586
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0               6,545,705
<SALES>                                      2,872,729               5,862,252
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               983,048               2,015,250
<CGS>                                        1,889,681               3,847,002
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  537,592               1,040,260
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 3,000                   6,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              15,057                  26,724
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                430,399                 948,266
<INCOME-TAX>                                   176,000                 386,600
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                   254,399                 561,666
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .12                     .26
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1



Subsidiaries of Borders Group, Inc.


SUBSIDIARY                           STATE OF INCORPORATION
----------                           ----------------------


Borders, Inc.                               Colorado
Borders Fulfillment, Inc.                   Delaware
Borders Management, LLC                     Michigan
Borders Online, LLC                         Delaware
Borders Online, Inc.                        Colorado
Borders Outlet, Inc.                        Colorado
Borders Properties, Inc.                    Delaware
Walden Book Company, Inc.                   Colorado
Waldenbooks Properties, Inc.                Delaware
Borders (UK) Limited
  formerly Books etc. Limited               U.K.
Borders New Zealand Limited                 New Zealand
Borders PTE. Limited                        Singapore
Borders Australia PTY, Limited              Australia
BGI (UK) Limited                            U.K.
BGP (UK) Limited                            U.K.
Evermatch Limited                           U.K.
Books Etc Properties Limited                U.K.
Meridian Books Limited                      U.K.
Borders Superstores (UK) Limited            U.K.
Charing Cross Properties Limited            U.K.
#### NOVA CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, Appellant, v. Sebastian BAZZANO, d/b/a Sal’s Tire Service, et al., Appellees.

No. 71-178.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

July 20, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 236 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 236

      To declare that July 28, 1994, be recognized as Parents Day.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             August 4, 1993

  Mr. Burton of Indiana submitted the following resolution; which was 
       referred to the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
      To declare that July 28, 1994, be recognized as Parents Day.

Whereas the values of sacrificial love and integrity are fundamental in 
        developing the moral character essential to maintaining a strong Nation;
Whereas parents by their example of sacrifical love and the transmission of 
        moral and cultural values play a crucial and determinant role in the 
        development of youth;
Whereas time has demonstrated that the traditional American family is the most 
        stable and secure environment in which parents can successfully rear 
        future generations;
Whereas the current breakdown of the traditional American family is a major 
        factor contributing to the rise of crime, teen pregnancy, educational 
        failure, substance abuse, and suicide among our Nation's youth; and
Whereas it is in the interest of society and government to adopt policies, that 
        help families stay together by strengthening and sustaining fathers and 
        mothers in fulfilling their parental roles: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That on Parents Day, July 28, 1994, all private citizens, 
organizations and governmental and legislative bodies at the local, 
State and Federal level are encouraged in recognize this day through 
proclamations, activities and educational efforts in the furtherance of 
recognizing, uplifting and supporting the role of parents in the 
rearing of their children.

                                 <all>
```
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 60372 Summary Calendar

ANIL KUMAR , Petitioner

v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, III, U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL , Respondent

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A087 947 849

Before REAVLEY, PRADO, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Anil Kumar petitions this court for review of the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing his appeal from the decision of the Immigration Judge (IJ) denying him asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture (CAT) relief. Because t he BIA relied upon the IJ’s decision, this court reviews both the IJ’s decision and the order of the BIA. See Wang v. Holder , 569 F.3d 531, 536 (5th Cir. 2009).

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED October 25, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 16-60372 Document: 00514210153 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/25/2017N o. 16

- 60372

2 Kumar does not brief the BIA’s denial of CAT relief, and he has therefore
abandoned the issu e. See Soadjede v. Ashcroft , 324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir. 2003). We lack jurisdiction to consider Kumar’s challenge to the dismissal of his asylum application as time barred since his argument is based upon factual, rather than legal, grounds. See Zhu v. Gonzales , 493 F.3d 588, 59 4

- 96 (5th Cir. 2007)

. We review the denial of withholding of removal under the substantial
evidence standard. See Efe v. Ashcrof t, 293 F.3d 899, 906 (5th Cir. 2002)

. W e “may not reverse the BIA’s factual findings unless the e vidence compels it.” Wang , 596 F.3d at 536

- 3 7

. Kumar “ must show that the evidence was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could conclude against it. ” Id. at 537. To qualify for withholding of removal, an a pplicant “must demonstrate a clear proba bility of persecution upon return.” Roy v. Ashcroft , 389 F.3d 132, 138 (5th Cir. 2004) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). A showing of past persecution gives rise to a rebuttable presumption that the applicant’s life or freedom will be thre atened in the future. 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(b)(1)(i). Kumar fails to show that the evidence compels a finding that he suffered past persecution. See Eduard v. Ashcroft , 379 F.3d 182,187

- 88 (5th Cir. 2004) (ho ld ing that petitioner who had suffered verbal thr eats and had s ustained injury on one occasion failed to establish past persecution ); Abdel

- Masieh

v. United States INS , 73 F.3d 579, 583

- 84 (5th Cir. 1996) (upholding
BIA finding that two arrests, two detentions, and beatings not characterized
as severe di d not rise to level of past persecution ). As Kumar relies almost exclusively on his evidence of past persecution to establish his entitlement to withholding of removal, he fails to show that the BIA’s denial was not based upon substantial evidence. See E fe , 293 F.3d at 906.
The petition for review is DENIED. Case: 16-60372 Document: 00514210153 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/25/2017
EXHIBIT 22.1



           CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

     As  independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the
incorporation into both (1) the Registration Statement on Form S-
8  of  Mustang  Software, Inc. (file no. 333-07269)  relating  to
444,000  shares of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of options
granted  under  the  Mustang Software, Inc.  1994  Incentive  and
Nonstatutory   Stock  Option  Plan  and  (2)   the   Registration
Statements on Form S-8 of Mustang Software, Inc. (file  no.  333-
07235)  relating  to 50,000 shares of Common  Stock  issuable  to
participants  pursuant  to the Mustang  Software,  Inc.  Employee
Stock  Purchase Plan of our report dated February 6, 1997 on  the
financial  statements of Mustang Software, Inc. which appears  in
this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31,
1996.

Los Angeles, California
March 29, 1997


                                   Arthur Andersen L.L.P.
263 La. 98

#### Michael E. CULLIGAN v. Wade O. MARTIN, Jr., Secretary of State, State of Louisiana, et al.

No. 52898.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 17, 1972.

In re: Michael E. Culligan applying for remedial and supervisory writs.

Writ refused. This Court will not exercise its supervisory jurisdiction when due to the element of time, any judgment which might be rendered could not become effective to afford relator the relief sought.

DIXON, J.,

is of the opinion that the time element does not prevent the consideration of the issues; ballots have not been printed, except for absentee ballots. Downs v. Pharis, 240 La. 580, 124 So.2d 553, is probably in error, and, if so, should be reversed.
H. Res. 418

In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

May 5, 1994.

Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall

be in order to consider the conference report to accompany

the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 218) setting forth

the congressional budget for the United States Government

for the fiscal years 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, and 1999. All

points of order against the conference report and against its

consideration are waived. The conference report shall be considered as read. The conference report shall be debatable for

one hour equally divided and controlled by chairman and

ranking minority member of the Committee on the Budget.

SEC. 2. Rule XLIX shall not apply with respect to the

adoption by the Congress of the conference report to accompany the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 218) setting
2

HRES 418 EH

forth the congressional budget for the United States Government for the fiscal years 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, and 1999.

Attest:

Clerk.
Exhibit 31.2



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

FLORIDA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMPANY

(Section 302)

I, George M. Bachman, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-Q of Florida Public Utilities Company (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 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 functions):

(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: May 14, 2008

By  /s/ George M. Bachman

George M. Bachman

Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    Exhibit 11.1

                              HELLO DIRECT, INC.
                      COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE
             FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996, 1995, AND 1994

<TABLE> 
<CAPTION> 


                                                                            1996           1995           1994
                                                                            ----           ----            ----
<S>                                                                    <C>             <C>             <C> 
Income before extraordinary item                                        $  741,000      $2,089,000      $1,249,000
                                                                        ==========      ==========      ==========
Net income                                                              $  741,000      $1,952,000      $1,249,000
                                                                        ==========      ==========      ==========
Weighted average common shares outstanding                               4,982,000       4,387,000         191,000
Common stock equivalents:
        Common stock options, utilizing treasury stock method           
         when dilutive                                                      61,000         138,000         132,000
        Preferred stock, utilizing as if converted method when
         dilutive                                                                -               -       2,535,000
        Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 83 issuances and grants (1)                -               -         346,000
                                                                        ----------      ----------      ----------

Weighted average shares outstanding                                      5,043,000       4,525,000       3,204,000
                                                                        ==========      ==========      ==========

Per share amounts                                                       
        Income before extraordinary item                                $    0.015      $     0.46      $     0.39
                                                                        ==========      ==========      ==========
        Net income                                                      $    0.015      $     0.43      $     0.39
                                                                        ==========      ==========      ==========
    
</TABLE> 


(1)  Pursuant to Securities and Exchange Commission Staff Accounting Bulletin
     No. 83, common and preferred stock issued for consideration below the
     assumed initial public offering (IPO) price, and stock options and warrants
     granted with exercise prices below the IPO price during the 12-month period
     preceding the date of the initial filing of the Registration Statement have
     been included in the calculation of common equivalent shares, using the
     treasury stock method, as if they were outstanding for all periods
     presented.
Exhibit
32.2





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350


ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





Certification of
CFO





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Frequency Electronics, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended July 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Alan L.
Miller, Chief Financial 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 to my 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 results of operations of the
      Company.





/s/  Alan
      Miller
            
            September
      14, 2009Alan
      L. MillerChief
      Financial Officer




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.




This
certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by
such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange
Act”).  Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by
reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the
Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it
by reference.
#### Porter W. HOMER, as Acting County Manager of Dade County, Florida, etc., et al., Appellants, v. DADELAND SHOPPING CENTER, INC., a Maryland corporation authorized to do business in the State of Florida, Appellee.

No. 68-75.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 2, 1970.

Thomas C. Britton, County Atty., and John G. Fletcher and Gerald T. Wethering-ton, Asst. County Attys., for appellants.

Sibley, Giblin, Levenson *&*Ward, Miami Beach, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, C. J., HENDRY, J., and PIERCE, WILLIAM C., Associate Judge.

*871ORDER ON MANDATE

PER CURIAM.

WHEREAS, the judgment of this court was entered on January 14, 1969 (217 So.2d 844) modifying and remanding for further proceedings the final judgment of the Circuit Court for Dade County, Florida, in the above styled cause; and

WHEREAS, on review of this court’s judgment, by certiorari, the Supreme Court of Florida, by its opinion and judgment dated December 10, 1969 (229 So.2d 834) and mandate dated January 27, 1970, quashed this court’s judgment and remanded the cause with directions;

NOW, THEREFORE, It is Ordered that the mandate of this court issued in this cause on February 11, 1969 is withdrawn, the opinion and judgment of this court filed January 14, 1969 is vacated, the opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida is herewith made the opinion and judgment of this court and Circuit Court with directions to enter final judgment for the defendant (petitioner), in accordance with the said opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida. Costs allowed shall be taxed in the Circuit Court (Rule 3.16(b) Florida Appellate Rules, 32 F.S.A.).