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

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 372 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 372

    Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives concerning 
providing as part of health care reform financial incentives to promote 
                  worksite health promotion programs.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 1, 1994

 Mr. Brown of Ohio (for himself and Mr. Upton) submitted the following 
resolution; which was referred jointly to the Committees on Energy and 
                    Commerce and Education and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives concerning 
providing as part of health care reform financial incentives to promote 
                  worksite health promotion programs.

    Resolved, it is the sense of the House of Representatives that, 
regardless of the particular approach taken to reform the health care 
system in the United States, there should be financial incentives for 
employers to offer worksite health promotion programs which provide 
appropriate screening, counseling, and education for employees at the 
worksite in order to promote health, safety, and personal involvement 
in preventing illness and injury.

                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 11

                        Golden West Financial Corporation
        Statement of Computation of Basic and Diluted Earnings Per Share
                 (Dollars in thousands except per share figures)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                       March 31
                                                             -----------------------------
                                                                 2001            2000
                                                             -------------   -------------
<S>                                                          <C>             <C>
 Income before Cumulative Effect of Accounting Change        $    176,079    $    125,934
 Cumulative effect of accounting change, net of tax                (6,018)            -0-
                                                             -------------   -------------
 Net Earnings                                                $    170,061    $    125,934
                                                             =============   =============

 Weighted Average Shares                                      158,478,170     159,958,610
     Add:   Options outstanding at period end                   6,121,905       5,589,129
     Less:  Shares assumed purchased back with
            proceeds of options exercised                       3,905,178       4,715,964
                                                             -------------   -------------
 Diluted Average Shares Outstanding                           160,694,897     160,831,775
                                                             =============   =============

 Basic Earnings Per Share before
     Cumulative Effect of Accounting Change                   $     1 .11    $        .79
 Cumulative effect of accounting change, net of tax                  (.04)            .00
                                                             -------------   -------------
 Basic Earnings Per Share                                     $      1.07    $        .79
                                                             =============   =============

 Diluted Earnings Per Share before
     Cumulative Effect of Accounting Change                   $      1.10    $        .78
 Cumulative effect of accounting change, net of tax                  (.04)            .00
                                                             -------------   -------------
 Diluted Earnings Per Share                                   $      1.06    $        .78
                                                             =============   =============
</TABLE>
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Solely in connection with the filing of the Quarterly Report of Retractable Technologies, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period
ended March 31, 2006, as filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned Thomas J. Shaw, Chief Executive Officer, and Douglas W. Cowan, Chief Financial Officer, do
hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the issuer.

May 15, 2006



/s/ Thomas J. ShawTHOMAS J. SHAWPRESIDENT, CHAIRMAN, ANDCHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER/s/ Douglas W. CowanDOUGLAS W. COWAN VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Company's Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 1996, and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                             421
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   24,711
<ALLOWANCES>                                       486
<INVENTORY>                                     15,433
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                47,621
<PP&E>                                          24,677
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,622
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  73,980
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           29,707
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           137
<OTHER-SE>                                      40,109
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    73,980
<SALES>                                        125,087
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               127,269
<CGS>                                           82,594
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   29,003
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   371
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 481
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 13,009
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,066
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,943
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.59
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00
        


</TABLE>
June 11, 2015

Mr. Daryl Vogan

136 First Street Georgetown, PA 15043

Dear Mr. Vogan:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption. It explains why we can not process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We entered your May 26, 2015, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015- 1919), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brenda Robeson Program Analyst, Airmen and Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk April 23, 2012

d0416 

# Order

April 23, 2012

144186

ALEX A. LEMERAND, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 144186 COA: 298637 Court of Claims LC No. 09-000067-MZ UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN REGENTS, Defendant-Appellee.

___________________ _____________________

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 20, 2011 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, it appearing to this Court that the
case of McCahan v Brennan (Docket No. 142765), is pending on appeal before this Court and that the decision in that case may resolve an issue raised in the present application for leave to appeal, we ORDER th at the application be held in ABEYANCE pending the
decision in that case.
EXHIBIT NO. 99



Supplemental Segment Information

|In thousands                     | Three Months Ended
October 31, | Six Months Ended
October 31,
|-------------------------------- | ------------------------------ | ----------------------------
|                                 |                                | (Restated)                  
|                                 | 2002                           | 2001                        
|Orders Received:                 |                                |                             
|Sign Making & Specialty Graphics | $  68,330                      | $  70,667                   
|Apparel & Flexible Materials     | 37,016                         | 35,789                      
|Ophthalmic Lens Processing       | 21,747                         | 19,733                      
|                                 | $127,093                       | $126,189                    
|                                 | =======                        | ======                      
|                                 |                                |                             
|                                 | October 31,2002                | April 30,2002               
|Backlog:                         |                                |                             
|Sign Making & Specialty Graphics | $      661                     | $   1,089                   
|Apparel & Flexible Materials     | 26,476                         | 27,284                      
|Ophthalmic Lens Processing       | 4,741                          | 4,276                       
|                                 | $ 31,878                       | $ 32,649                    
|                                 | =======                        | ======
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 562 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 562

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                       October 5, 1994.
    Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker 
may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule XXIII, declare the House resolved into the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 5044) to establish the American Heritage Areas Partnership Program, 
and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. 
General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour 
equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of 
the Committee on Natural Resources. After general debate the bill shall be 
considered for amendment under the five-minute rule for a period not to exceed 
three hours (excluding time consumed by recorded votes and proceedings 
incidental thereto). Each section shall be considered as read. No amendment to 
the bill shall be in order unless printed in the portion of the Congressional 
Record designated for that purpose in clause 6 of rule XXIII before the 
beginning of consideration of the bill. Any amendment to the bill caused to be 
printed in the Record by Representative Vento of Minnesota may amend portions of 
the bill not yet read for amendment. At the conclusion of consideration of the 
bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House 
with such amendments as may have been adopted. The previous question shall be 
considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage 
without intervening motion except one motion to recommit.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
EXHIBIT NO. 32.1

 

WRITTEN STATEMENT

 PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

 

The undersigned, Marc T. Giles, the Chief Executive Officer of Gerber Scientific, Inc. (the "Company"), pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, hereby certifies that:

(i)	the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the three months ended January 31, 2004 filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(ii)	the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated:  March 15, 2004

/s/ Marc T. Giles
## IN THE COURT OF CRIMINA L APP EALS OF TEX AS

N O

. W R

- 5 9 , 2 0 1

- 0 3

E X P A R T E R I C H A R D V A S Q U E Z , A p p l i c a n t

O N A P P L I C A T I O N F O R P O S T

- C O N V I C T I O N W R I T O F H A B E A S C O R P U S A N D M O T I O N T O S T A Y T H E E X E C U T I O N I N C A U S E N O

. 9 8

- C R

- 0 7 3 0

- E I N

T H E 1 4 8 J U D I C I A L D I S T R I C T C O U R T

T H N U E C E S C O U N T Y

P e r c u r i a m . K E L L E R , P

. J

. , a n d M E Y E R S , J

. , w o u l d d e n y t h e s t a y .

O R D E R

T h i s i s a s u b s e q u e n t a p p l i c a t i o n f o r a w r i t o f h a b e a s c o r p u s f i l e d p u r s u a n t t o t h e

p r o v i s i o n s o f

T e x a s C o d e o f

C r i m i n a l P r o c e d u r e A r t i c l e 1 1

. 0 7 1 § 5 a n d a m o t i o n f o r a s t a y

o f e x e c u t i o n

.

I n J u n e 1 9 9 9 , a j u r y f

o u n d a p p l i c a n t g u i l t y o f t h e o f f e n s e o f c a p i t a l m u r d e r

. T h e j u r y

a n s w e r e d t h e s p e c i a l i s s u e s s u b m i t t e d p u r s u a n t t o T e x a s C o d e o f C r i m i n a l P r o c e d u r e A r t i c l e

3 7

. 0 7 1 , a n d t h e t r i a l c o u r t , a c c o r d i n g l y , s e t a p p l i c a n t ’ s p u n i s h m e n t a t d e a t h

. T h i s C o u r t

a f f i r m e d a p p l i c a n t ’ s c o n v i c t i o n a n d s e n t e n c e o n d i r e c t a p p e a l

. V a s q u e z v

. S t a t e , N o

. A P

-V a s q u e z
- 2

7 3 , 4 6 1 ( T e x

. C r i m

. A p p

. O c t

. 3 , 2 0 0 1 ) ( n o t d e s i g n a t e d f o r p u b l i c a t i o n )

. T h i s C o u r t d e n i e d

r e l i e f o n a p p l i c a n t ’ s i n i t i a l p o s t

- c o n v i c t i o n a p p l i c a t i o n f o r a w r i t o f h a b e a s c o r p u s , a n d i t

d i s m i s s e d a s u b s e q u e n t w r i t a p p l i c a t i o n i n t h e s a m e o r d e r

. E x p a r t e V

a s q u e z , N o s

. W R

5 9 , 2 0 1

- 0 1 a n d W R

- 5 9 , 2 0 1

- 0 2 ( T e x

. C r i m

. A p p

. J a n

. 2 6 , 2 0 0 5 ) ( n o t d e s i g n a t e d f o r

p u b l i c a t i o n )

.

O n A p r i l 1 5 , 2 0 1 5 , a p p l i c a n t f i l e d i n t h e t r i a l c o u r t t h i s h i s s e c o n d s u b s e q u e n t

a p p l i c a t i o n f

o r a w r i t o f h a b e a s c o r p u s

. T h e C o u r t n o w o r d e r s a p p l i c a n t ’ s e x e c u t i o n s t a y e d

p e n d i n g f

u r t h e r o r d e r o f t h i s C o u r t

.

I T I S S O O R D E R E D T H I S T H E 2 0 D A Y O F A P R I L , 2 0 1 5

. T H

D o N o t P u b l i s h
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14** 

**- 7232** 

RONALD N. HASKINS
,

Plaintiff

- Appellant

,

v.

BRIAN K. HAWK, Correctional Officer

,

Defendant

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Baltimore

. Timothy J. Sullivan

, Magistrate Judge. ( 1:11

- cv

- 02000

- TJS )

Submitted : May 19, 2015 Decided: May 21, 2015

Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS , Circuit Judges , and DAVIS
, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Ronald N. Haskins, Appellant Pro Se. Douglas F . Gansler, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland; Laura Mullally, Assistant Chief Counsel, Pikesville, Marylan d, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Ronald N. Haskins appeals from the district court’s order,

following a jury verdict, entering judgment in favor of the

D efendant in Haskins’ 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ( 20 12 ) suit . We have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,

we affirm

. * We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

AFFIRMED

* We also deny Haskins’ motion for injunctive relief as moot and not in compliance with Fed. R. App. P. 8.
TRAMETRICH D. JOHNSON

,

Petitioner,

v.

JULIE L. JONES

, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections,

Respondent.
___________________________/ IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 14

- 5590

Opinion filed January 6, 2015.

Amended P etition for W rit of H abeas C orpus

-- Original Jurisdiction

.

Trametrich D. Johnson, pro se , Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee; Jennifer Parker, General Counsel,

Tallahassee , for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

DENIED.

ROBERTS, RAY, and MAKAR, JJ.

, CONCUR.
#### Thomas E. ROSSIN, Appellant, v. Judith C. ROSSIN, Appellee.

No. 69-3.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 18, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### SOUTHEAST TITLE AND INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. Cindy CALDWELL, a minor, by her father and next friend, William J. Caldwell, For the Benefit of Patricia Robin Benson and Raymond W. Benson, Appellee.

No. 72-967.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

May 21, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 537 Reported in House (RH)]

                                                 House Calendar No. 221

103d CONGRESS

  2d Session

                              H. RES. 537

                          [Report No. 103-736]

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the 
bill (H.R. 4539) making appropriations for the Treasury Department, the 
 United States Postal Service, the Executive Office of the President, 
and certain Independent Agencies, for the fiscal year ending September 
                   30, 1995, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                           September 21, 1994

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed
                                                 House Calendar No. 221
103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 537

                          [Report No. 103-736]

Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the 
bill (H.R. 4539) making appropriations for the Treasury Department, the 
 United States Postal Service, the Executive Office of the President, 
and certain Independent Agencies, for the fiscal year ending September 
                   30, 1995, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 21, 1994

  Mr. Beilenson, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following 
resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the 
bill (H.R. 4539) making appropriations for the Treasury Department, the 
 United States Postal Service, the Executive Office of the President, 
and certain Independent Agencies, for the fiscal year ending September 
                   30, 1995, and for other purposes.

    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
order to consider the conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 
4539) making appropriations for the Treasury Department, the United 
States Postal Service, the Executive Office of the President, and 
certain Independent Agencies, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
1995, and for other purposes. All points of order against the 
conference report and against its consideration are waived. The 
conference report shall be considered as read.
```
# C_2023179EN.01000901.xml

| 22.5.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 179/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 179/9

---

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 28 February 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial No 1 de Pontevedra — Spain) — Dalarjo SL and Others v Renault Trucks Sasu

(Case C-285/21, (1) Dalarjo and Others)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Actions for damages for infringements of the provisions of EU competition law - European Commission decision finding an infringement - Specialised trucks - Articulated dumper)

(2023/C 179/12)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Audiencia Provincial No 1 de Pontevedra

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Dalarjo SL and Others

Defendant: Renault Trucks Sasu

Operative part of the order

European Commission Decision C(2016) 4673 of 19 July 2016 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 [TFEU] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39824 — Trucks) must be interpreted as meaning that specialised trucks, including articulated dumpers, fall within the products covered by the cartel found in that decision.

---

(1)  Date of filing: 28.4.2021.

---