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

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 514 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 514

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                       August 10, 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. 4822) to make certain laws applicable to the 
legislative branch of the Federal Government. The first reading of the bill 
shall be dispensed with. General debate shall be confined to the bill and the 
amendments made in order by this resolution and shall not exceed one hour, with 
thirty minutes equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on Rules and thirty minutes equally divided and 
controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on House 
Administration. After general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the five-minute rule. In lieu of the committee amendments now printed in 
the bill, it shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose 
of amendment under the five-minute rule an amendment in the nature of a 
substitute consisting of the text of H.R. 4892 modified by the amendments 
printed in part 1 of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 
resolution. That amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as 
read. No amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in 
order except those printed in part 2 of the report of the Committee on Rules. 
Each amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be 
offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, 
shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and 
controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment 
except as specified in the report, and shall not be subject to a demand for 
division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. All 
points of order against amendments printed in part 2 of the report are waived. 
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. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House on any amendment 
adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the amendment in the 
nature of a substitute made in order as original text. 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 with or without 
instructions.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
# Materials Not Included in

Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket

Docket Number: FAA

- 2014

- 1046

Directorate Identifier: 2014NM021AD

CSP B

- 053, PART 1, R14

--- 7/10/13

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the

Supplemental AD Docket



### MAY BE VIEWED AT: Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate

Rules Docket

1601 Lind Ave. SW.,

Renton, WA 98057

425.227.1221

DURING THE HOURS OF: 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays.

Form Date: 03/05/2008
# C_2022073EN.01004002.xml

| 14.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 73/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 73/40

---

Judgment of the General Court of 15 December 2021 — QF v Commission

(Case T-85/21) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Recruitment - Internal competition COM/03/AD/18 (AD 6) - Decision not to include the applicant’s name on the reserve list for the competition - Obligation to state reasons - Secrecy of the selection board’s proceedings - No communication of the intermediate marks or the weighting of the elements of a test specified in the competition notice)

(2022/C 73/49)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: QF (represented by: S. Orlandi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Milanowska and T. Lilamand, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for annulment of the decision of the selection board for the internal competition COM/03/AD/18 (AD 6) — Administrators of 15 April 2020 rejecting the applicant’s request for review of the decision of that selection board of 16 December 2019 not to include the applicant’s name on the reserve list for that competition.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the selection board for the internal competition COM/03/AD/18 (AD 6) — Administrators of 15 April 2020 not to include QF on the reserve list for the recruitment of administrators at grade AD 6 in the field of European public administration; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the selection board for the internal competition COM/03/AD/18 (AD 6) — Administrators of 15 April 2020 not to include QF on the reserve list for the recruitment of administrators at grade AD 6 in the field of European public administration;

| 2. | Orders the European Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 98, 22.3.2021

---
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Pedro (Pete) P. Rodriguez, 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, the Annual Report of Exar Corporation on Form 10-K for the period ended March 29, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information
contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Exar Corporation.

Date: June 12, 2009



|                                               
|-----------------------------------------------
|/s/    PEDRO (PETE) P.
RODRIGUEZ               
|Pedro (Pete) P. Rodriguez                      
|Chief Executive Officer, President and Director
|(Principal Executive Officer)
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-12-00706-CR

Leo WELDER,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 7, Travis County, Texas

Trial Court No. C-1-CR-10-216013

The Honorable Elisabeth A. Earle, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE STONE, JUSTICE ANGELINI, AND JUSTICE MARTINEZ

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is 

AFFIRMED.

SIGNED August 30, 2013.

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice
Exhibit 31.2



I, Vincent J. Milano, Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the registrant, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of ViroPharma
Incorporated.



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 consolidated financial
statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4. The registrants other certifying officer and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) 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 subsidiary, 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 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 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.



|                                                     
|-----------------------------------------------------
|/s/    VINCENT J.
MILANO                             
|Vincent J. Milano                                    
|Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
|August 5, 2004
salP : fn Moore Y8. Hanaooa,~ 103 s. w. 666, it is

_ "

. ..n. . , w&&z

d uardian’ 6 bond $8 redtiosd~ to a sum ooihai ~erablglless bhm the .:i Value of the ,ward’# property ia total alaregard ef the statute ; suck actloll mu& be hslii 

### null and void."



### : Zhe Court ,‘~howe~?,r, q,uoted Woerner, Amerioan Lay of Adm2tistration, aa hollows:
,, “, ., ‘

. * “,, I I- : ‘

.

-Hon. R. A. Barton - Page 2 (V-324)

%wm a oontrarention

voluntarybond, ii 

### not&xi or pub110 pplioqqr 8t+Utory law, 18 blndlng on tae laamn; -0 

### a bond glvem for the performme of 

### a **trout mpoaod,**  whether publio or pr%v&e, i

men though 

### this promOwow8t b0 a OO~~UOC propoeitlonor law, yet we would not a&in t&t din Qolul, ty Judge aooept th4 

### proff4reb money ueourlty ror In !um no ouoh authority. The proper oourlle to purllu rmltl be for fhe guardian to exeoutr tha rtatrrtorv.btia rtbh & uuroty or uuretier au requlre6 bf Utiolr d&4&

A .oouaty $ndge ici a ot l uthorlra6 to aoorpt the prrronal bond of a guardianM the l u$at* of

a nona om p ou mentim 8euuW by 6 deporit o? oaoh rith tha Oourt or 9) drr itr dirootloa ln lleu ot a band Nth ormtlor 

### aa re~uire6 by the 8ht~k8~ lrrtb Oh. Stat., Arta. 4140~414ae fdlrr ve*ry tmly*
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed January 13, 2021.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D20-0569

Lower Tribunal No. 15-15102

________________

The Children's Home Society of Florida, a non-party,

Petitioner,

vs.

K.W., K.J., R.B., R.B. and R.B.,

Respondents.

A Writ of Certiorari to the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Laura Anne

Stuzin, Judge.

Klein Glasser Park & Lowe, P.L., and Kayla A. Riera-Gomez and Andrew M.

Feldman, for petitioner.

Thomasina F. Moore, Statewide Director of Appeals and Laura J. Lee, Senior

Attorney (Tallahassee), for the Statewide Guardian ad Litem Office.

Karla Perkins, Appellate Counsel for the Department of Children & Families.

Before LOGUE, LINDSEY and LOBREE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.
2

The Children’s Home Society of Florida (“CHS”), a non-party to the

dependency proceeding below, seeks a writ of common law certiorari directed at the 

lower court’s March 9, 2020 order holding it in civil contempt and imposing a fine

of $2,500 per day to compel compliance with a prior order.

A party cannot be held in contempt for non-compliance with a court order if 

the party did not have the present ability to comply with the court order. See, e.g., 

Wilcoxon v. Moller, 132 So. 3d 281, 287 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014); Harris v. Hampton, 

70 So. 3d 747, 749 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011); Boby Express Co. v. Guerin, 930 So. 2d 

842, 844 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006). In addition, the Florida Rules of Juvenile Procedure 

impose specific requirements on any order finding a party in contempt. Rule 8.286, 

which applies to all indirect civil contempt proceedings, provides: “If the court 

orders . . . a coercive fine . . . for failure to comply with a prior order, the court must 

set conditions for purge of the contempt, based on the contemnor’s present ability to 

comply.” Fla. R. Juv. P. 8.286(e). The same rule also expressly requires “a separate 

affirmative finding that the contemnor has the present ability to comply with the 

purge and the factual basis for that finding.” Thus, before imposing contempt 

sanctions, the lower court was obligated to make affirmative findings, supported by 

facts, that CHS had the ability to comply with the conditions for the purge of the 

contempt. It did not do so. See Dep’t of Children & Families v. R.H., 819 So. 2d 

858, 862 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002); see also Winton v. Saffer, 158 So. 3d 703, 704 (Fla. 
3

3d DCA 2015); Creative Choice Homes, II, Ltd. v. Keystone Guard Servs., Inc., 137 

So. 3d 1144, 1148 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014). As such, the lower court departed from the 

essential requirements of the law in finding that CHS had (and now has) the ability 

to comply with the amended order adjudging it guilty of indirect civil contempt.

Accordingly, we grant the petition for certiorari and quash the order under 

review.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 116 Referred in House (RFH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                 S. 116

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 10, 1994

               Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
              For the relief of Fanie Phily Mateo Angeles.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
That, notwithstanding any provision of the Immigration and Nationality 
Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.), Fanie Phily Mateo Angeles shall be held 
and considered to have been lawfully admitted to the United States for 
permanent residence as of the date of the enactment of this Act upon 
payment of the required visa fee. Upon the granting of permanent 
residence to such alien as provided for in this Act, the Secretary of 
State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by the proper number, 
during the current fiscal year or the fiscal year next following, the 
total number of immigrant visas which are made available to natives of 
the country of the alien's birth under section 203(a) of such Act, or 
if applicable, the total number of immigrant visas which are made 
available to natives of the country of the alien's birth under section 
202(e) of such Act.

            Passed the Senate May 9 (legislative day, May 2), 1994.

            Attest:

                                                MARTHA S. POPE,

                                                             Secretary.
```
257 La. 459

#### Succession of Leo HEYMANN.

No. 51090.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 18, 1971.

In re: Leo E. Heymann, applying for certiorari, or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Orleans. 240 So.2d 905.

Not considered. Not timely filed.
Exhibit
23.1








Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm








We
consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
33-64149, 33-61587, 33-61589, 333-48507,  333-147170 and 333-147171 on
Form S-8 and Registration Statement No. 333-18023 on Form S-3 of Habersham
Bancorp of our report, dated February 29, 2008,  appearing in this
Annual Report on Form 10-K of Habersham Bancorp for the year ended December 31,
2007.


\s\Porter
Keadle Moore, LLP








Atlanta,
Georgia


March 28,
2008
**Exhibit 32**
**CERTIFICATION**
Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in his capacity as an officer of Vitran CorporationInc., that, to his knowledge, the Quarterly Report of Vitran Corporation Inc. on Form 10-Q for thethree months ended March 31, 2005, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such report fairly presents,in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of Vitran CorporationInc.        Date: April 20, 2005 By:  /s/ RICHARD E. GAETZ    Richard E. Gaetz    President and
# Materials Not Included in **Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket**

Docket Number: F AA - 2014 - 0004 Directorate Identifier: 2013NM143AD

A320 - 57 - 1149 --- 4/1/08

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the Supplemental AD Docket 

### MA **Y BE VIEWED AT:** Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate Rules Docket 1601 Lind Ave. SW., Renton, WA 98057 425.227.1221 **DURING THE HOURS OF:** 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Form Date: 0 3/05/2008
```

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 239 (Tuesday, December 14, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 77871]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-31303]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE U.S.

[Public Notice 2010-0059]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Final Collection; 
Comment Request

AGENCY: Export-Import Bank of the U.S.

ACTION: Submission for OMB review and comments request.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Form Title: Application for Express Insurance.
SUMMARY: The Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank), as a 
part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent 
burden, invites the general public and other Federal Agencies to 
comment on the proposed information collection, as required by the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
    The Application for Express Insurance will be used to determine the 
eligibility of the applicant and the creditworthiness of one of the 
applicant's foreign buyers for Export-Import Bank assistance under its 
insurance program. Export-Import Bank customers will be able to submit 
this form on paper.
    This is a new application form for use by small U.S. businesses 
with limited export experience. Companies that are eligible to use the 
Express policy will need to answer approximately 20 questions and sign 
an acknowledgement of the certifications that appear on the reverse of 
the application form. This program does not provide discretionary 
credit authority to the U.S. exporter, and therefore the financial and 
credit information needs are minimized. This new form incorporates the 
recently updated standard Certification and Notices section as well as 
two questions about the amount of U.S. employment to be supported by 
this policy.
    Based upon comments received we have changed the name of this form 
from Application for Short-Term Express Export Credit Insurance Policy 
to Application for Express Insurance.
    The form can be viewed at http://www.exim.gov/pub/pending/EIB10_02.pdf.

DATES: Comments should be received on or before January 13, 2011 to be 
assured of consideration.

ADDRESSES: Comments maybe submitted electronically on http://www.regulations.gov or by mail to Office of Information and Regulatory 
Affairs, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20038 attn: OMB 3048-
xxxx.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Titles and Form Number: EIB 10-02 
Application for Express Insurance.
    OMB Number: 3048-xxxx.
    Type of Review: New.
    Need and Use: The Application for Express Insurance will be used to 
determine the eligibility of the applicant and the transaction for 
Export-Import Bank assistance under its insurance program.
    Annual Number of Respondents: 500.
    Estimated Time per Respondent: 15 minutes.
    Government Annual Burden Hours: 1,000 hours.
    Frequency of Reporting or Use: Once per year.

Sharon A. Whitt,
Agency Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010-31303 Filed 12-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6690-01-P
```
#### STATE EX REL. VILLAGE OF CLARA CITY v. GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY AND ANOTHER.1

April 20, 1916.

Nos. 19,805—(81).

Second appeal — law of the case.

Decision on former appeal the law of the case. [Reporter.]

After the former appeal reported in 130 Minn. 480, 153 N. W. 879, judgment was entered in the district court for Chippewa county pursuant to the order for judgment, Qvale, J. From the judgment so entered, relator appealed.

Affirmed.

*M. L. Countryman*and *Thomas R. Benton,*for appellants.

*Fosnes*& *Fosnes,*for respondent.

1

 Reported in 157 N. W. 1069.

Per Curiam.

Appeal by defendant railway companies from a judgment of the district court of Chippewa county commanding them to build and maintain a sidewalls: in the village of Clara City on the south side of Bunde street across the right of way of defendants, to connect with sidewalks on each side of the right of way. The case was here before on an appeal by relator from an order sustaining a demurrer to the complaint, and is reported in 130 Minn. 480, 153 N. W. 879. We adhere to the views expressed in the opinion on the former appeal.. As no question is presented on the present appeal that was not decided when the case was here before, the result is that the judgment appealed from must be affirmed.

So ordered.