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

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 749 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 749

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently extend the 
 15-year recovery period for qualified leasehold improvement property, 
    qualified restaurant property, and qualified retail improvement 
                               property.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 17, 2013

   Mr. Casey (for himself, Mr. Cornyn, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Crapo, Mr. 
 Menendez, Mr. Brown, Mr. Begich, Ms. Collins, Mrs. Hagan, Mr. Inhofe, 
 Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Risch, Mr. Vitter, and Mr. Wicker) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                                Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently extend the 
 15-year recovery period for qualified leasehold improvement property, 
    qualified restaurant property, and qualified retail improvement 
                               property.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT EXTENSION OF TREATMENT OF QUALIFIED LEASEHOLD 
              IMPROVEMENT PROPERTY AS 15-YEAR PROPERTY FOR PURPOSES OF 
              DEPRECIATION DEDUCTION.

    (a) In General.--Clause (iv) of section 168(e)(3)(E) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by section 311(a) of the 
American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (Public Law 112-240), is amended 
by striking ``placed in service before January 1, 2014''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to property placed in service after December 31, 2012.

SEC. 2. PERMANENT EXTENSION OF TREATMENT OF QUALIFIED RESTAURANT 
              PROPERTY AS 15-YEAR PROPERTY FOR PURPOSES OF DEPRECIATION 
              DEDUCTION.

    (a) In General.--Clause (v) of section 168(e)(3)(E) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by section 311(a) of the American 
Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (Public Law 112-240), is amended by 
striking ``placed in service before January 1, 2014''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to property placed in service after December 31, 2012.

SEC. 3. PERMANENT EXTENSION OF TREATMENT OF QUALIFIED RETAIL 
              IMPROVEMENT PROPERTY AS 15-YEAR PROPERTY FOR PURPOSES OF 
              DEPRECIATION DEDUCTION.

    (a) In General.--Clause (ix) of section 168(e)(3)(E) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by section 311(a) of the 
American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (Public Law 112-240), is amended 
by striking ``, and before January 1, 2014''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to property placed in service after December 31, 2012.
                                 <all>
```
```
**Exhibit 32

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

     In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of American Italian Pasta
Company (the  "Company")  for the annual  period ended  September  29, 2006 (the
"Report"), the undersigned,  in the capacities and dates indicated below, hereby
certify  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted  pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of  2002,  that,  to our  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.

Date:  June 23, 2008                   /s/ John P. Kelly
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       John P. Kelly
                                       President and Chief Executive Officer

Date:  June 23, 2008                   /s/ Paul R. Geist
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Paul R. Geist
                                       Executive Vice President and Chief
                                       Financial Officer
                                       (principal financial and accounting
                                       officer)
```
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 2

- 09

- 359

- CV

DEREK SCHAEFER APPELLANT

V.

MEGAN M. SCHAEFER APPELLEE

----------

FROM THE 393 RD DISTRICT COURT OF DENTON COUNTY

----------



### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1 

### AND JUDGMENT

----------

On June 15, 2010, we notified appellant that his brief had not been filed

as required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.6(a). See Tex. R. App. P.

38.6(a). We stated we could dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution

unless appellan t or any party desi ring to continue this appeal filed with the

court within ten days a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal.

See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3. We have not received any response.

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.2

Because appellant = s brief has not been filed, we dismiss the appe al for

want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a), 42.3(b), 43.2(f).

PER CURIAM

PANEL: GARDNER, WALKER, and MCCOY, JJ.

DELIVERED: July 29 , 2010
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLAImages

# DLA Images

Search

Search

                                  - All Images 
                                  - Other 

                                  - Upload Date
                                  - Photo Date
                                  - Title

Share

----

Download Image: Small ()Medium ()Full Size (0.09 MB)

Tags:DLA Disposition Services, dla, RESERVES, reservist, Navy , Defense Logistics Agency

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
---

Exhibit 15.1



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Board of Directors, 
  Reg Technologies Inc.

We consent to the inclusion in the Form 20-F of our report dated August 24, 2009, except for Note 14 which is as of November 13, 2009, on the consolidated balance sheet of Reg Technologies Inc. as of April 30, 2009 and the related consolidated statements of loss and comprehensive loss, stockholders' equity and cash flows for the year then ended.

DMCL (signed)

DALE MATHESON CARR-HILTON LABONTE LLPCHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS

Vancouver, Canada 
  November 13, 2009



---
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 this Quarterly
Report of Mojo Data Solutions, Inc. (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2018, as
filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Daniel Sobolewski, Interim Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Sec. 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 Company.



|Date: January 16, 2019 | By: | /s/ Daniel Sobolewski                                     
|---------------------- | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------
|                       |     | Daniel Sobolewski                                         
|                       |     | Interim Chief Financial Officer, Mojo Data Solutions, Inc.

| |  | 
| |  |
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

ALPHONSO WILLIAMS,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 240 MAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 22nd day of September, 2020, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLAImages

# DLA Images

Search

Search

                                  - All Images 
                                  - Other 

                                  - Upload Date
                                  - Photo Date
                                  - Title

Share

----

Download Image: Small ()Medium ()Full Size (3.09 MB)

Tags:CLB-31, Landing Zone, combat logistics battalion 31, Landing Support Platoon, Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 262 (reinforced), air-ground-logistics, VMM-262 (Rein.), EXTERNAL LIFT, disaster relief Indo-Asia-Pacific, Military Operations, training, 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit, Operations, Combat, Humanitarian Assistance, MARINES

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
Exhibit
31.2



CERTIFICATION
BY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



Certification
of Chief Financial Officer

of
Periodic Report Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and Rule 15d-14(a)



I,
Kristin Van Dask, Chief Financial Officer, certify that:



1)
I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of TP Flexible Income Fund, Inc. (the “Company”);



2)
Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary
to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect
to the period covered by this report;



3)
Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented
in this report;



4)
The Company’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15 (e)) for the Company 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 Company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others
within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



b)
evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’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 Company’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
Company’s most recent fiscal quarter (the Company’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting;
and



5)
The Company’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control
over financial reporting, to the Company’s auditors and the audit committee of the Company’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 Company’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 Company’s
internal control over financial reporting.



Date:
May 17, 2019



|/s/
    Kristin Van Dask          | 
|--------------------------------- | 
|Kristin
    Van Dask              | 
|Chief
    Financial Officer       | 
|(Principal
    Financial Officer) |
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 23.1 -- CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

                         Independent Auditors' Consent

The Board of Directors
Weirton Steel Corporation:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements
(Nos. 333-84943 and 333-39352) on Form S-8 of Weirton Steel Corporation of our
reports dated January 31, 2003, with respect to the consolidated balance sheet
of Weirton Steel Corporation as of December 31, 2002 and the related
consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss, changes in
stockholders' equity (deficit), and cash flows, and the related financial
statement schedule, which reports appear in the December 31, 2002, annual report
on Form 10-K of Weirton Steel Corporation.

Our reports dated January 30, 2003 each contain an explanatory paragraph that
states that the Company has sustained significant losses from operations and
also has a total stockholders' deficit that raises substantial doubt about its
ability to continue as a going concern. The consolidated financial statements
and financial statement schedule do not include any adjustments that might
result from the outcome of that uncertainty.

/s/ KPMG LLP

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
March 28, 2003
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 23.1




                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation of our
reports, included or incorporated by reference in this Form 10-K, into the
Company's previously filed Registration Statements on Form S-8, Registration No.
33-31429, relating to the Company's 1989 Employee Stock Purchase Plan and
Registration No. 33-56251, relating to the Company's 1994 Employee Stock
Purchase Plan and Deferred Compensation Plan for Directors.




                                                            ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP



Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania,
March 29, 1999
# Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed May 18, 2022. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ No. 3D21-1654 Lower Tribunal No. 20-5401 CC

________________ 

### Rehab Restoration, LLC, etc. ,

Appellant,
vs. 

### Citizens Property Insurance Corporation ,

Appellee. An Appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Luis Perez-Medina, Judge. Valiente, Carollo & McElligott, PLLC, and Caroline M. Carollo and Matthew McElligott, for appellant. Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A., and David C. Borucke (Tampa), for appellee. Before SCALES, HENDON and BOKOR, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed.
Exhibit 105


		
			EXHIBIT 10.5
		

		
			 
		

		
			2016 DIRECTOR FEES
		

		
			(Revised to reflect an increase in Deferred Stock Units)
		

		
			 
		

			
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

				
	
					
						   

					
					
						   

					
					
						   

				
	
					
						Retainer Fee:

					
					
						  

					
					
						$247,000/per year

					
						Cash: $86,000

					
						Deferred Stock Units*: $161,000

				
	
					
						   

					
					
						   

				
	
					
						Non-Executive Chairman of the Board Fee:

					
					
						  

					
					
						$200,000/per year in Deferred Stock Units

				
	
					
						   

					
					
						   

				
	
					
						Committee Chair Fee for Compensation, Corporate Governance and Finance Committees:

					
					
						  

					
					
						$20,000/per year

				
	
					
						   

					
					
						   

				
	
					
						Audit Committee Chair Fee:

					
					
						  

					
					
						$30,000/per year

				
	
					
						   

					
					
						   

				
	
					
						Audit Committee Member Retainer Fee:

					
					
						  

					
					
						$10,000/per year

				
	
					
						   

					
					
						   

				
	
					
						Lead Director Retainer Fee:

					
					
						  

					
					
						$25,000/per year

				



		
			 
		

		
			 
		

			
					
						 

					
					
						 

				
	
					
						*

					
					
						Deferred Stock Units are “phantom” units of LNC Common Stock that are credited under the LNC Directors’ Deferred Compensation Plan.

				



		
			 
		

		
			All cash fees may be deferred, at a Director’s election, pursuant to the LNC Directors’ Deferred Compensation Plan.
		

		
			 
		

		
			Meeting fees may be paid in some cases for meetings which exceed the number of annually scheduled meetings ($1,100 per meeting) as determined by the Corporate Governance Committee.
		

		
			 
		

		
			All fees are paid to the directors on a quarterly basis in arrears.
that this court's duty is to decide actual controversies and not to give

opinions on moot questions).

It is so ORDERED.'



### Ai J. Douglas
Saitta cc: Chris Hough Clark County District Attorney/Civil Division, Robert J. Gower

'We direct the clerk of this court to file petitioner's letter, provisionally received in this court on September 30, 2011; and motion to stay potential dismissal for failing to pay the filing fee, provisionally received in this court on September 30, 2011. Having considered these documents, we conclude that no action is necessary as to them.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A 2
"STaTE OF v;ASUir^,

2016SEP 26 Kiill:30

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

STATE OF WASHINGTON,

Respondent,

v.

ROBERT L. KING,

Appellant.

No. 73755-4-1

DIVISION ONE

UNPUBLISHED OPINION

FILED: September 26, 2016

Becker, J. — Appellant Robert King was convicted of one count of

threatening to bomb or injure property, one count of stalking, and three counts of

cyberstalking. We accept the State's concession of error and remand for further

proceedings.

Two of the cyberstalking convictions were based on a single text message

threatening King's ex-girlfriend's two daughters. King argues the two convictions

violate double jeopardy because the unit of prosecution for cyberstalking is for

each electronic communication.

"A person is guilty of cyberstalking if he or she, with intent to harass,

intimidate, torment, or embarrass any other person . . . makes an electronic

communication." RCW 9.61.260(1) (emphasis added). King compares this

cyberstalking statute to an arson statute that prohibits causing "a fire or

explosion," so the unit of prosecution is for each fire caused, State v. Westling,
No. 73755-4-1/2

145 Wn.2d 607, 611-12, 40 P.3d 669 (2002), and a statute that prohibits

possessing "a stolen access device," so the unit of prosecution is for each stolen

access device possessed, State v. Ose, 156 Wn.2d 140, 144-46, 124 P.3d 635

(2005).

The State concedes the alleged double jeopardy violation and agrees that

one of the convictions for cyberstalking must be vacated and the case remanded

for resentencing. We accept the concession.

King also contends all of his convictions constitute the same criminal

conduct for the purpose of calculating this offender score. Although King did not

raise this issue in the trial court, the State does not object to allowing him to

present the argument to the trial court on remand. We agree it is appropriate to

have the issue of same criminal conduct resolved by the trial court on remand.

King asks that appellate costs not be awarded against him. The State is

not seeking an award of appellate costs in this appeal. Consequently, none will

be awarded.

Remanded.

^J^iPj \ •

WE CONCUR:

A^(_J krx.J-