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

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4113

To amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit the practice by mental

health care providers of using bounty hunters to attract patients for

treatment.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 23, 1994

Mr. BRYANT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit the practice by mental health care providers of using bounty

hunters to attract patients for treatment.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Mental Health Care

5 Providers Bounty Prevention Act of 1994’’.

6 SEC. 2. TITLE 18 AMENDMENT.

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 89 of title 18, United

8 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the

9 following:
2

•HR 4113 IH

1 ‘‘§ 1822. Mental health care provider bounties prohib2 ited

3 ‘‘(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully solicits or re4 ceives any remuneration (including any kickback, bribe, or

5 rebate) directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash

6 or in kind—

7 ‘‘(1) in return for referring an individual to a

8 mental health care provider for the furnishing or ar9 ranging for the furnishing of any item or service; or

10 ‘‘(2) in return for purchasing leasing, ordering,

11 or arranging for or recommending purchasing, leas12 ing, or ordering any good, facility, or service, or item

13 from a mental health care provider;

14 shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than

15 5 years, or both.

16 ‘‘(b) Whoever knowingly and willfully offers or pays

17 any remuneration (including any kickback, bribe, or re18 bate) directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or

19 in kind—

20 ‘‘(1) to refer an individual to a mental health

21 care provider for the furnishing or arranging for the

22 furnishing of any item or service; or

23 ‘‘(2) to purchase, lease, order, or arrange for or

24 recommend purchasing, leasing, or ordering any

25 good, facility, or service, or item from a mental

26 health care provider;
3

•HR 4113 IH

1 shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than

2 5 years, or both.

3 ‘‘(c) Any conduct which under section 1128B(b)(3)

4 of the Social Security Act is precluded from being a viola5 tion of that section is not a violation of this section.

6 ‘‘(d) As used in this section, the term ‘mental health

7 care provider’ means any provider of goods or services for

8 the diagnosis and treatment of mental illness, if the pro9 vider operates in or affects interstate or foreign com10 merce.’’.

11 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections

12 at the beginning of chapter 89 of title 18, United States

13 Code, is amending by adding at the end the following:

‘‘1822. Mental health care provider bounties prohibited.’’.

Æ
103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3724

AN ACT

To designate the United States courthouse located in Bridgeport, Connecticut, as the ‘‘Brien McMahon Federal

Building’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

4 The United States courthouse located at 915 Lafay5 ette Boulevard in Bridgeport, Connecticut, shall be known

6 and designated as the ‘‘Brien McMahon Federal Build7 ing’’.
2

•HR 3724 EH

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

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

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the court4 house referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a ref5 erence to the ‘‘Brien McMahon Federal Building’’.

Passed the House of Representatives May 23, 1994.

Attest:

Clerk.
3

•HR 3724 EH

1

2
103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3724

AN ACT

To designate the United States courthouse located

McMahon Federal Building’’.in Bridgeport, Connecticut, as the ‘‘Brien
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                              5
       
<S>                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                            MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                      155,964
<SECURITIES>                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                               300,709
<ALLOWANCES>                                      0
<INVENTORY>                                 267,125
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            795,352
<PP&E>                                      700,578
<DEPRECIATION>                                    0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                            2,452,019
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                     1,114,650
<BONDS>                                           0
<COMMON>                                      5,292
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                        0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>              2,452,019
<SALES>                                     907,435
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  0
<CGS>                                       718,714
<TOTAL-COSTS>                             1,015,820
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            2,207
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (98,889)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (69,167)
<DISCONTINUED>                             (29,222)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                               (98,889)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0.02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0
        



</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                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 Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report of Applied
Digital Solutions, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K/A for the period ending
December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Evan C. McKeown, 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:

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

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




By: /s/ Evan C. McKeown
-----------------------
Evan C. McKeown
Chief Financial Officer
March 16, 2004


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Applied Digital Solutions, Inc. and will be retained by Applied
Digital Solutions, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

OP 21-0395

L.B., 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.

Defendants-Appellees.

ORDER

Pursuant to MRAP 26(1), Plaintiff-Appellant L.B. is given an extension of 

time until October 15, 2021, in which to prepare, file, and serve Plaintiff-Appellant 

L.B.’s opening brief in this matter. 

Electronically signed by:

Bowen Greenwood

Clerk of the Supreme Court

August 24 2021

08/24/2021

Case Number: OP 21-0395
**Exhibit 32**

 

 

**Certification of Chief Executive Officerand Principal Financial Officer**

**Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as AdoptedPursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

I, James P. Foran, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the quarterly report on Form 10-Q forthe quarterly period ended June 30, 2013 of JPX Global, Inc. fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of JPX Global, Inc.

 

Date: August 19, 2013

 

By:	*/s/ James P. Foran*	

James P. Foran

Chief Executive Officer

and Principal Financial Officer
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-50104 USDC No. W-94-CV-140

DANIEL T. PLOOF , Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus W. GOOD, JR., Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

- - - - - - - - - - April 15, 1997 Before SMITH, DUHE’ and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Daniel T. Ploof (Texas inmate #642997), moves this court for leave to appeal in forma pauperis (IFP) under the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PLRA) in his appeal from the district court's dismissal of his suit pursuant to F ED . R. C IV . P. 41(b) for failure to prosecute. The motion for leave to proceed IFP is GRANTED.No. 96-50104 -2- The PLRA requires a prisoner appealing IFP in a civil action to pay the full amount of the filing fee, $105. As Ploof does not have funds for immediate payment of this fee, he is assessed a partial filing fee of 96¢ in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). Following payment of the partial filing fee, funds shall be deducted from Ploof’s prisoner account until the full filing fee is paid. Id. IT IS ORDERED that Ploof pay the appropriate filing fee to the Clerk of the District Court for the Western District of Texas. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the agency having custody of Ploof’s inmate account shall collect the remainder of the $105 filing fee and forward for payment to the Clerk of the District Court for the Western District of Texas in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). A review of the trial transcript reveals no reversible error; Ploof's conduct at trial rose to a level warranting dismissal with prejudice for failure to prosecute. McCullough v. Lynaugh , 835 F.2d 1126, 1127 (5th Cir. 1988); Boudwin v. Graystone Ins. Co. , 756 F.2d 399, 401 (5th Cir. 1985); Berry v. CIGNA/RSI-CIGNA , 975 F.2d 1188, 1191 (5th Cir. 1992). The decision is AFFIRMED.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Denali Commission","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.denali.gov","author_name":"denaliadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/www.denali.gov\/author\/denaliadmin\/","title":"Newtok residents begin relocation to Mertarvik","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"zhir5zzr0H\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.denali.gov\/newtok\/\">Newtok residents begin relocation to Mertarvik<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.denali.gov\/newtok\/embed\/#?secret=zhir5zzr0H\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Newtok residents begin relocation to Mertarvik” — Denali Commission\" data-secret=\"zhir5zzr0H\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.denali.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/newtok2-1.jpg","thumbnail_width":540,"thumbnail_height":355}
#### Ralph GOODMAN and Leonard Feldman, Appellants, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 66-983.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Sept. 19, 1967.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 14, 1967.

Barry L. Garber, Miami, for appellants.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Arden M. Siegendorf, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before PEARSON, BARKDULL and HENDRY, JJ.

PEARSON, Judge.

The appellants were charged, tried and convicted after a joint jury trial of the crimes of (1) breaking and entering a building with intent to commit a felony, to wit: grand larceny; (2) attempted grand larceny; (3) possession of burglary tools. Each defendant was sentenced as follows: Count (1) — IS years; Count (2) — two and one-half years; Count (3) — five years; the sentences to run consecutively.

Three points are presented. Point one claims error upon the trial court’s denial of defendants’ motion at the conclusion of the State’s case to require the State to elect to proceed upon either Count (1) or Count (2). It is not necessary to rule upon this point in view of our holding that the judgment and sentence upon Count (2) must be reversed. Point two claims error upon *342the imposition of a sentence upon the judgment in Count (2) because it is urged that under the facts of this case the Counts (1) and (2) consist of two aspects of a single transaction. It is not necessary to rule on this point for the same reason.

Point three urges that the trial court was in error in adjudging the defendants guilty upon Count (2) because that count charged that each defendant “did *attempt*to take from the possession of the true owner, or to steal and carry away certain goods”; but the verdict of the jury was “We find the defendant guilty as charged with the *intent*to commit grand larceny”. [Emphasis supplied] We agree that the verdict will not support the judgment of guilty as to this count.

Section 921.03 Fla.Stat. F.S.A., provides as follows:

> “If a verdict is rendered from which it can be clearly understood that it is the intention of the jurors to acquit the defendant, judgment of not guilty shall be rendered thereon even though the verdict is defective; but no judgment of guilty shall be rendered on a verdict unless the jurors clearly express a finding against the defendant *upon the issue.”*[Emphasis supplied.]

 It is *true that in*order for an attempt at grand larceny to occur, the perpetrator must have the requisite intent and commit acts in furtherance of such intent. The mere intent standing alone is insufficient to constitute a violation of law. See Gustine v. State, 86 Fla. 24, 97 So. 207 (1923). The verdict as returned against the appellants with regard to Count (2) of the information does not reflect a determination of the issue as is required by Chapter 921.03 of the Florida Statutes, F.S.A.

The judgment and sentence of each defendant upon Count (2) of the information is reversed. In all other aspects the judgments and sentences are affirmed.

Affirmed in part and reversed in part.
<PAGE>


                                                                 EXHIBIT 99.1



Supergen's board authorizes one million share stock repurchase program

     SAN RAMON, Calif., Sept. 28, 2000 -- SuperGen Inc. (NASDAQ: SUPG & SUPGZ)
announced today that its board of directors has authorized a stock repurchase
program of up to one million shares of the Company's common stock.

     "Our directors have strongly agreed that repurchasing SuperGen shares at
this time is a very responsible use of the company's substantial cash
resources," said Dr. Joseph Rubinfeld, chairman and chief executive officer of
SuperGen. "With approximately $150 million in cash, equivalents and investments,
our financial position is sufficiently strong to allow for both stock repurchase
and continued execution of our strategy to be a leader in oncology. Indeed, our
decision to implement this program underscores not only our belief that
SuperGen's shares are substantially undervalued, but also our pledge to enhance
shareholder value."

     SuperGen expects to use existing cash to finance these repurchases. The
Company expects such purchases to be effected from time to time -- in the
open market, in private transactions or otherwise, subject to market
conditions. No assurance can be given as to the time period over which the
shares will be repurchased or as to whether and to what extent the share
repurchases will be consummated.

     Based in San Ramon, California, SuperGen is a pharmaceutical company
dedicated to the development and commercialization of products intended to treat
life-threatening diseases, particularly cancer.

     This press release contains `forward-looking' statements within the meaning
of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and are subject to the safe harbors
created thereby. Such statements, including the statements regarding the
strength of our financial position to execute our strategy to be a leader in
oncology and our expected stock repurchases, involve certain risks and
uncertainties. Actual results could differ materially from those projected in
the `forward-looking' statements as a result of failure to obtain the clinical
data necessary to support marketing approval of our products under development,
unforeseen delays in clinical-trial management, adverse FDA actions, matters
arising out of our relationship with Abbott Laboratories, our failure to
complete stock repurchases due to our need to use our cash in currently
unexpected ways or changes in market conditions, as well as other risk factors
discussed in SuperGen's reports on file with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission (including, but not limited to, the report in Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 1999, and the report in Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June
30, 2000).

                                      # # #
Exhibit 32.2



Certification Pursuant to

U.S.C. Section 1350,

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



In connection with the Annual Report of Devcon International Corp. (the
Company) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert C. Farenhem, Interim 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:



| | (1) | The report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |                                             
|-------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------
|Date: April 29, 2005 |  | /s/ Robert C. Farenhem                      
|                     |  | Robert C. Farenhem                          
|                     |  | Interim Chief Financial Officer             
|                     | 
|                     |  | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
Exhibit 10.55

 

	
 
    	
Effective   January 1, 2014
    


 

Charles Stanford

[address]

 

Dear Mr. Stanford:

 

This will confirm our agreement to amend your employment agreement with Crown Media Holdings, Inc. (“Crown”) dated January 1, 2012 (the “Agreement”), as follows:

 

The term of the Agreement and your employment by Crown as set forth in Paragraph 2 of the Agreement is extended until December 31, 2015, unless otherwise terminated in accordance with the terms of the Agreement.

 

Except as amended herein, all other terms of the Agreement will remain in full force and effect.

 

 

	
 
    	
Very truly   yours,
    
	
 
    	
Crown Media   Holdings, Inc.
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
By:
    	
/s/ William   Abbott
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
Name:   William Abbott
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
Title:   President and Chief Executive Officer
    


 

	
Agreed and   Accepted:
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
/s/ Charles   Stanford
    	
 
    
	
Charles   Stanford
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  Year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                 DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           450,880
<SECURITIES>                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    200,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                           0
<INVENTORY>                                            0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               2,150,880
<PP&E>                                           157,562
<DEPRECIATION>                                    78,246
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 2,251,944
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             77,883
<BONDS>                                                0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                            0
<COMMON>                                           6,092
<OTHER-SE>                                     2,167,969
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   2,251,944
<SALES>                                                0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   3,022
<CGS>                                                  0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    757,824
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 7,500
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (762,302)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        (456)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (762,758)
<DISCONTINUED>                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                        0
<CHANGES>                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (762,758)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       (.23)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       (.23)
        


</TABLE>