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

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 338 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 338

Providing amounts from the contingent fund of the House for expenses of 
  investigations and studies by the Committee on Rules in the second 
               session of the One Hundred Third Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 2, 1994

   Mr. Moakley (for himself and Mr. Solomon) submitted the following 
resolution; which was referred to the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Providing amounts from the contingent fund of the House for expenses of 
  investigations and studies by the Committee on Rules in the second 
               session of the One Hundred Third Congress.

    Resolved, That (a) for expenses of investigations and studies by 
the Committee on Rules (hereinafter in this resolution referred to as 
the ``Committee''), including expenses for provision of assistance for 
members of professional staff in obtaining specialized training under 
section 202(j) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946, there 
shall be paid out of the contingent fund of the House not more than 
$722,479.
    (b) Not more than $2,500 of the amount specified in subsection (a) 
may be used for specialized training referred to in such subsection.
    Sec. 2. Payments under this resolution shall be made on vouchers 
authorized by the Committee, signed by the chairman of the Committee, 
and approved by the Committee on House Administration.
    Sec. 3. Amounts shall be available under this resolution for 
investigations and studies carried out during the period beginning at 
noon on January 3, 1994, and ending immediately before noon on January 
3, 1995.
    Sec. 4. Amounts made available under this resolution shall be 
expended in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Committee on 
House Administration.

                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 32.2

                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                       AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     In connection with the Quarterly  Report of Golden  Enterprises,  Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the third quarter ended March 2, 2007, as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Patty Townsend, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted  pursuant to ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002, that, to the best of 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.

Dated: April 11, 2007



/s/ Patty Townsend
------------------
Patty Townsend
Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer

A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to Golden Enterprises, Inc. and will be retained by Golden Enterprises,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission, or its staff, upon
request.

                                       24
II

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1036

To authorize the Administrator of the General Service Administration to

enter into agreements for the construction of border stations on the

United States borders with Canada and Mexico, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 27 (legislative day, APRIL 19), 1993

Mr. DECONCINI introduced the following bill; which was read twice and

referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To authorize the Administrator of the General Service Administration to enter into agreements for the construction of border stations on the United States borders

with Canada and Mexico, 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. AUTHORIZATION.

4 The Administrator of the General Services Adminis5 tration may enter into agreements with State and local

6 governments of the United States for the construction of

7 border stations on the borders of the United States with
2

•S 1036 IS

1 Canada and Mexico. Agreements under this Act shall be

2 authorized only for facilities—

3 (1) that meet applicable Federal government re4 quirements for border stations;

5 (2) that are located on sites approved by the

6 Commissioner of the United States Customs Service,

7 the Commissioner of the Immigration and Natu8 ralization Service, the Secretary of Agriculture, and

9 the Administrator of the General Services Adminis10 tration; and

11 (3) which have been approved by the Commit12 tees on Appropriations of the House of Representa13 tives and the Senate, the Public Works and Trans14 portation Committee of the House of Representa15 tives, and the Environment and Public Works Com16 mittee of the Senate.

17 SEC. 2. TERMS OF AGREEMENTS.

18 (a) IN GENERAL.—An agreement entered into under

19 this Act shall provide for the acquisition of land and mate20 rials for the construction of border stations.

21 (b) TERMS AND LIMITATIONS.—

22 (1) OBLIGATIONS OF FUNDS.—The obligation

23 of the United States under an agreement entered

24 into under this Act shall be limited to the current

25 fiscal year for which payments are due without re-
3

•S 1036 IS

1 gard to section 3328(a)(1)(B) of title 31, United

2 States Code.

3 (2) DURATION OF AGREEMENT.—An agreement

4 entered into under this Act shall provide for lease or

5 installment payments over a period of not to exceed

6 30 years for the payment of the purchase price and

7 reasonable interest.

8 (3) VESTING OF TITLE.—An agreement entered

9 into under this Act shall provide for the title to the

10 property and facilities to vest in the United States

11 on or before the expiration of the contract term, on

12 fulfillment of the terms and conditions of the agree13 ment.

14 SEC. 3. BUDGETARY TREATMENT.

15 Nothwithstanding any other provision of law, or

16 guidelines or regulations issued pursuant thereto, the obli17 gations of the Federal government arising out of an agree18 ment entered into under this Act shall be scored each fis19 cal year based on the estimated expenditures in the fiscal

20 year.

Æ
us. Department 

of 

__ Trmspor101ion Admin_ 

Nov 29 2010 

Mr. Alfred S. Reynolds 

President 

Maine Scenic Airways, Inc. 

P.O. Box 1144 

Belfast, ME 04915 

Dear Mr. Reynolds: 

Exemption No. 9831A 

800 Irldependence Ave .. S W 

Washington. 0 C 20591 

Regulatory Docket No. F AA-2009-0131 

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No. 9831, 

as amended. It explains the basis for our decision and describes its effect. 

Tbe Basis for Our Decision 

By letter dated October 28, 2010, you petitioned the Federnl Aviation Administration (FAA) 

on behalf of Main Scenic Airways (Maine Scenic) for an extension of Exemption No. 9831, as 

amended. That exemption from § Part 121 , appendices 1 and J of Title 14, Code of Federal 

Regulations allows Maine Scenic to cover its safety-sensitive employees under one testing 

program 

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons 

relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption. 

The FAA has detennined that good cause exists for not publishing a swnmary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested extension of the exemption would not set a 

precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Maine Scenic. 

Our Decision 

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 9831, as 

amended, remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. Therefore, 

AFS-ll-029-E 
Our Decision 

The FAA has detennined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 9831, as 

amended, remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. Therefore, 

under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701 , which the FAA Administrator 

has delegated to me, I grant your petition. 

Conditions and Limitations 

I. Employees of Maine Scenic are subject to the drug and alcohol regulations at all 

times while conducting operations under part 135 or part 91. 

2. The drug and alcohol testing program must be implemented under the auspices of 

the Maine Scenic part 135 operation, not under part 91. 

The Effect of Our Decision 

Our decision extends the tennination date of Exemption No. 9831, as amended, to 

March 31, 2013 unless sooner superseded or rescinded. 

All conditions and limitations of Exemption No. 9831 , as amended, remain the same. This 

letter must be attached to, and is a part of, Exemption No. 9831. 

Sincerely, 

~~ Frederick E. Tilton, M.D . Federal Air Surgeon 

2
<PAGE>

                                 EXHIBIT 10.17

                     AMENDMENT TO BUSINESS LOAN AGREEMENT


     This Amendment to Business Loan Agreement and Master Revolving Note (this
"Amendment"), effective as of October 13, 2000, is entered into by and between
Comerica Bank-California ("Bank") and Taitron Components Incorporated, a
California corporation ("Borrower").

     Bank and Borrower are parties to that certain Business Loan Agreement dated
as of May 6, 1997 (as heretofore amended, together with the Addendum attached to
and made a part thereof, the "Business Loan Agreement").  In connection with the
Business Loan Agreement, Borrower entered into that certain Master Revolving
Note dated May 6, 1997 in the maximum principal amount of $16,000,000 (the
"Revolving Note") and that certain Addendum to Master Revolving Note dated as of
May 6, 1997 (the "Note Addendum").

     Borrower has requested, and Bank has agreed, to make certain amendments to
the Business Loan Agreement, as set forth below.

     For good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which
are hereby acknowledged, Bank and Borrower agree as follows:

     1.   Section 2(a) of the Addendum to the Business Loan Agreement is hereby
amended and restated to read in full as follows:

          (a) Tangible Effective Net Worth in an amount not less than (i)
     $25,350,000 at any time prior to December 31, 2000 and (ii) from and after
     December 31, 2000, the sum of $25,350,000 plus 100% of net income for each
     fiscal year, commencing with fiscal year 2000 (net income being determined
     in accordance with GAAP, but excluding stock repurchases and dividends,
     provided that in no event shall such net income be deemed to be less than
     zero).

     2.   Section 2(b) of the Addendum to the Business Loan Agreement is hereby
amended and restated to read in full as follows:

          (d) A ratio of Current Assets to Current Liabilities of not less than
     2.0 : 1.0.

     3.   Bank hereby waives any Default or Event of Default to the extent
arising solely under Section 8(m) of the Business Loan Agreement by virtue of
having repaid the outstanding indebtedness under the Subordinated Note prior to
the date hereof.

     4.   Borrower and Bank hereby affirm that each of the Business Loan
Agreement, the Revolving Note and the Note Addendum remains in full force and
effect without modification except as expressly provided in this Amendment.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Borrower and Bank have duly executed and delivered this
Amendment as of the date first written above.

TAITRON COMPONENTS INCORPORATED          COMERICA BANK-CALIFORNIA


By: /s/ Stewart Wang                          By: /s/ Jason Brown

                                      39
No. 11194.

#### Close *v.*Parker, Treasurer, et al.

Decided November 24, 1908.

Error to Circuit Court of Lucas county.

*Mr. B. A. Hayes,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. C. S. Northup,*city solicitor, and *Mr. Orion W. Nelson,*for defendants in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew and Summers, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                            9
<CIK>                         946738
<NAME>                        Harrodsburg First Financial Bancorp, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1.000
<CASH>                                         438
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         4,627
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    3,329
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         6,774
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           6,616
<LOANS>                                        96,562
<ALLOWANCE>                                    385
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 113,632
<DEPOSITS>                                     86,714
<SHORT-TERM>                                   0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            1,922
<LONG-TERM>                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       24,778
<OTHER-SE>                                     218
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 113,632
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                3,545
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              246
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               128
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               3,919
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             1,945
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             1,945
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          1,974
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  15
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                1,090
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                920
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     920
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   607
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0.39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.39
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                 3.2
<LOANS-NON>                                    0
<LOANS-PAST>                                   397
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                               0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               370
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  0
<RECOVERIES>                                   0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              385
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           385
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                            0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        0



</TABLE>
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Vernon W. JONES.

No. 62091.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 5, 1978.

In re: Vernon W. Jones, applying for writs of review, prohibition and/or mandamus. Parish of East Baton Rouge.

Writ denied. No abuse of discretion.
#### DADE COUNTY et al., Appellants, v. The AMERICAN FEDERATION OF POLICE, a non-profit Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. 41967.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Nov. 1, 1972.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 11, 1972.

*373Stuart Simon, County Atty., and Robert A. Ginsburg, Asst. County Atty., for appellants.

■ Michael S. Hacker and J. Bruce Phelps, Miami, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant taxing authorities contended in a Dade County Circuit Court declaratory judgment proceeding that the appellee fraternal institution was subject to assessment in 1971 for ad valorem and tangible personal property tax purposes. The ap-pellee institution resisted the assessment, claiming that it qualified for exemption from taxation under Fla.Stat. § 196.191 (3) (1969), F.S.A., a statute exempting from taxation certain properties of “educational, literary, benevolent, fraternal, chari-ble and scientific institutions”, depending on their use. In response, the taxing authorities contended that the statute in question was without constitutional validity because Article VII, Section 3(a) of the Florida Constitution, F.S.A., did not recognize “fraternal purposes” as being exempt.

We concur in the judgment of the Circuit Court that the statute was constitutional, and further that the appellee was in compliance with it in 1971. In passing, we note that “fraternal” has been deleted from the current wording of the statute; see Fla.Stat. § 196.012(1), F.S.A.

The judgment directly appealed from is hereby affirmed.

It is so ordered.

ROBERTS, C. J., CARLTON, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ., and DREW, J. (Retired), concur.

DEKLE, J., dissents with opinion.

DEKLE, Justice

(dissenting).

I respectfully dissent on the ground that appellee did not as a matter of law factually meet the requirements for exemption under Fla.Stat. § 196.191(3) (1969), F.S.A.

I would remand and direct that the contested property tax be paid by appellee under the factual situation then existing.
**Exhibit32**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Solelyin connection with the filing of the Quarterly Report of RetractableTechnologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period endedMarch 31, 2007, as filed with the United States Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned Thomas J. Shaw,Chief Executive Officer, and Douglas W. Cowan, Chief Financial Officer, dohereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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

 
| Date: May 15, 2007 |   | /s/ Thomas J. Shaw                         |
|-------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------|
|                    |   | THOMAS J. SHAW                             |
|                    |   | PRESIDENT, CHAIRMAN, AND                   |
|                    |   | CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER                    |
|                    |   |                                       |
|                    |   |                                       |
|                    |   | /s/ Douglas W. Cowan                       |
|                    |   | DOUGLAS W. COWAN                           |
|                    |   | VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER |

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                      5
<CIK>                          0000751256
<NAME>                         DYCO OIL AND GAS PROGRAM 1985-2

<S>                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                   DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                             40,962
<SECURITIES>                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                      82,496
<ALLOWANCES>                            0
<INVENTORY>                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                  123,458
<PP&E>                         22,431,141
<DEPRECIATION>                 22,397,968
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    172,887
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>               4,647
<BONDS>                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                             0
<COMMON>                                0
<OTHER-SE>                        165,013
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>      172,887
<SALES>                           199,029
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                  199,814
<CGS>                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                     156,541
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                    43,273
<INCOME-TAX>                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                43,273
<DISCONTINUED>                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0
<CHANGES>                               0
<NET-INCOME>                       43,273
<EPS-BASIC>                          9.89
<EPS-DILUTED>                           0



</TABLE>
#### JOHN K. JARVIS *vs.*JAMES MANLOVE.

In trespass assault and battery, words uttered by the plaintiff against the defendant, on a former occasion, are not admissible in mitigation.

Nor statements made by third parties to the defendant of such words.

The defendant's condition in life and occupation, may be put in evidence.

"Conviction and fine for the public offence, is not evidence in the private suit.

This was an action of trespass, assault and battery. The defen*453dont had assaulted the plaintiff and beaten him with a cowhide whip, in a public office in Dover, The plea was not guilty, and on the trial evidence was offered of expressions made by the plaintiff derogatory of the defendant, several days before the assault. This was objected to, and *Lee*vs. Woolsey, 19 *Johns. Rep.,*319, and *Avery*vs. *Ray,*1 *Mass. Rep.,*12, were cited.

*Msher*and *Saulsbury,*for plaintiff.

*Booth,*for defendant.

*The Court*

ruled out the evidence.

Evidence was also offered in mitigation of damages, of a conversion between John P. Manlove and James Manlove, in which the defendant was informed of certain reflections cast upon him by the plaintiff, on the morning of the day when the assault was made.

A majority of the court ruled out the evidence, the Chief Justice dissenting.

The defendant offered evidence of the defendant’s condition in life and occupation, to mitigate the damages.

The plaintiff objected, and cited contra, *Vaughan*vs. *Warren,*Sussex, last term, where it was held contra.

A majority of the court admitted this proof. Judge Wootten dissenting. Judge Wootten understood the evidence as going beyond the proof merely of the defendant’s pecuniary means, and as involving character,- arising from position, which he thought inadmissible.

It was proved that the defendant was a farmer, a renter of land, and engaged in buying and selling cattle, &c. He had no capital. His debts amounted to $1,500.

The defendant offered in evidence the record of his conviction on an indictment for this assault and battery. It was objected to and ruled out. The defendant’s counsel cited 2 *Greenl. Ev.,*390.

He offered to prove that he had paid the fine of another person, who was also convicted as acting with him on the occasion; which was ruled out.

The case went to the jury, under a charge from Judge Wootten ; and plaintiff had a verdict for $-