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

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 62 

To authorize the production of records by the Permanent Subcommittee 

on Investigations of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 27, 2013 

Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. MCCONNELL) submitted the following 

resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

To authorize the production of records by the Permanent 

Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on 

Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. 

Whereas, the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of 

the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 

Affairs conducted an investigation into offshore profit 

shifting and the United States tax code; 

Whereas, the Subcommittee has received a request from a 

federal law enforcement agency for access to records of 

the Subcommittee’s investigation; 

Whereas, by the privileges of the Senate of the United States 

and Rule XI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, no evidence under the control or in the possession of the Senate can, by administrative or judicial process, be taken 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

SRES 62 ATS 

from such control or possession but by permission of the 

Senate; 

Whereas, when it appears that evidence under the control or 

in the possession of the Senate is needed for the promotion of justice, the Senate will take such action as will 

promote the ends of justice consistent with the privileges 

of the Senate: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Chairman and Ranking Minority 

2 Member of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investiga3 tions of the Committee on Homeland Security and Govern4 mental Affairs, acting jointly, are authorized to provide 

5 to law enforcement officials, regulatory agencies, and 

6 other entities or individuals duly authorized by federal, 

7 state, or foreign governments, records of the Subcommit8 tee’s investigation into offshore profit shifting and the 

9 United States tax code. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 09-1994

In Re: TRACEY C. THARP, a/k/a Yvette Decker, a/k/a Tracie 

Davis, a/k/a Tracie Moody, a/k/a Tracey Davis Tharp, a/k/a 

Tracy Davis, 

 Petitioner. 

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. 

(2:04-cr-00034-RBS-JEB-2) 

Submitted: November 17, 2009 Decided: November 20, 2009 

Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. 

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Tracey C. Tharp, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

Tracey C. Tharp petitions for a writ of mandamus 

seeking an order compelling the Bureau of Prisons to let her 

finish her prison sentence in home confinement. 

Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner 

has a clear right to the relief sought. In re First Fed. Sav. & 

Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). Further, 

mandamus is a drastic remedy and should only be used in 

extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 

426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th 

Cir. 1987). 

Tharp has not demonstrated that she has a clear right 

to the relief sought, nor has she demonstrated that the district 

court has a duty to grant that relief. Accordingly, although we 

grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition 

for writ of mandamus. We dispense with oral argument because 

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before the court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process. 

PETITION DENIED
Reinstated; Motion Granted; Order filed December 23, 2014. 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-14-00427-CR

____________

NARJES MODARRESI, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 339th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1260243

ORDER

On December 18, 2014, this court abated this appeal and requested that the 

trial court conduct a hearing to determine the reason for the failure to file 

appellant’s brief. Appellant’s counsel, Vivian R. King, filed a motion for extension 

of time to file appellant’s brief, which contained a reasonable explanation for the 

late brief. Accordingly, we order the appeal REINSTATED. We GRANT 

appellant’s request for an extension of time to file appellant’s brief to January 30, 

2015, with a notation that no further extensions of time will be granted absent 
exceptional circumstances.

The request for the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine the reason 

for the failure to file a brief is WITHDRAWN. 

PER CURIAM
Exhibit 32.1



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 Annual Report of MangoSoft, Inc.
(the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Dale Vincent, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted by 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.



|    |  |                                                                    
|--- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------
|By: |  | /s/ Dale Vincent                                                   
|    |  | Chief Executive Officer (principal executive and financial officer)
|    |  | March 26, 2004                                                     



This certification is made solely for
purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, subject to the knowledge standard contained therein, and not for any other purpose.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           2,979
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,887
<ALLOWANCES>                                       495
<INVENTORY>                                        507
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 7,927
<PP&E>                                             898
<DEPRECIATION>                                   (386)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   8,439
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,897
<BONDS>                                          1,782
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            8,930
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           786
<OTHER-SE>                                     (5,956)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     8,439
<SALES>                                         18,671
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                18,671
<CGS>                                           12,077
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   12,077
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,429
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   450
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 145
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (932)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (932)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (932)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.09)<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.09)<F1>
<FN>
<F1> EPS PRIMARY AND EPS DILUTED HAS BEEN RESTATED AS REQUIRED BY THE 
     COMPANY'S ADOPTION OF STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING STANDARD NO. 128
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
Order entered May 6 , 2020

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05
- 20
- 00290
- CR No. 05
- 20
- 0029 2
- CR JAMES ARNAZ RANDLE, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 203rd Judi cial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No s . F 17
- 30614
- P & F17
- 30615
- P

O RDER Appellant ’ s notices of appeal were timely filed in the trial court on June 4,
2018 , but for unknown reasons , were not forward ed to this Cou rt until March 3,
2020. According to the docketing statement, the reporter ’ s record was requested on February 19, 2020. To date, the reporter ’ s record has not b een filed , and we have had no communication from cour t reporter Debi Harris

. We ORDER court re po r ter Debi Harris to file the comple t e r epor ter ’ s record in th es e appeals within T HIRTY DAYS of the date of t his order.We DIRECT th e Clerk t o s end copies of this order to the Honorable Raquel

Jones, Presiding Judg e, 2 0 3rd Judicial District Court; Debi H ar ris, court reporter;
Cr ystal Brown , offici al court reporter , 2 0 3rd Judicial District Court; and couns el for all pa rties.

/s/ LANA MYERS JUSTICE
December 10, 2014

By Email

Mr. Robert Finamore

Division Chief

Foreign Air Carrier Licensing

U.S. Carrier Licensing Division

Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Ave., S.E.

Washington, D.C. 20590

Re: Application of JetMagic Ltd for an Exemption and Foreign Air Carrier Permit 

(DOT-OST-2014-0214)

Dear Mr. Finamore, 

JetMagic Ltd (JetMagic) has completed its poll of the U.S. carriers served with its 

applications of December 3, 2014 for exemption authority pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 40109 and a 

foreign air carrier permit pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 41301 (E.U. – U.S.)

JetMagic received no objection from each of the carriers served. Accordingly we 

request expedited approval of our application.

Respectfully,

 

Joanne W. Young

Counsel for JetMagic Ltd

cc: Service List
Scott,

Hate to keep bugging you. How's the cost info coming (see below)? Any cost info will be public information and placed in the docket. Thanks John Schakenbach U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Clean Air Markets Division schakenbach.john@epa.gov Phone: 202 - 343 -9158 Fax: 202 - 343 - 2359

----- Forwarded by John Schakenbach/DC/USEPA/US on 08/18/2010 03:56PM ----- To: sevans@cleanair.com From: John Schakenbach/DC/USEPA/US Date: 08/10/2010 08: 06AM Subject: Fw: Request for Cost Information Scott, Louis Nichols said he talked with you at CIBO. Welcome back. Any luck with the cost info (see below) to help me address some cost comments on the proposed rule?. John Schakenbach U.S. Environmenta l Protection Agency Clean Air Markets Division schakenbach.john@epa.gov Phone: 202 - 343 -9158 Fax: 202 - 343 - 2359

----- Forwarded by John Schakenbach/DC/USEPA/US on 08/10/2010 08:04 AM ----- From: John Schakenbach/DC/USEPA/US To: sevans@cleanair.com Date: 08/05/2010 09:12 AM Subject:Request for Cost Information

Scott, I'm writing the response to comments document for the AETB and PGVP proposed rule. There are a number of comments related to cost. It would help me a lot if you could provide a cost estimate for each of the following, which is a direct quote from a commenter: "(1) the cost of staff time to develop and implement the quality manual required by the ASTM practice, including document control procedures, hiring of additional perso nnel, performance of annual audits, and documentation of corrective action;(2) application fees and the cost of preparing applications for accreditation and/or QI

qualification; (3) the cost of QI exams, including tuition for preparatory courses, exam fees, and travel expenses; (4) any new costs associated with preparation of test plans and reports to comply with the specific criteria in the practice; and (5) cost of required records storage and backup. While the costs may turn out to be reasonable and EPA may be of the view that AETBs already should be operating in a manner consistent with the ASTM practice, that view is not a justification for excluding those costs from the ICR." Thanks John Schakenbach U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Clean Air Markets Division schakenbach.john@epa.gov Phone: 202 - 343 -9158 Fax: 202 - 343 - 2359
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 39 (Tuesday, February 28, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 12077]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4635]


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

JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES


Meeting of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Rules of 
Evidence

AGENCY: Judicial Conference of the United States Advisory Committee on 
Rules of Evidence.

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Advisory Committee on Rules of Evidence will hold a one-
day meeting. The meeting will be open to public observation but not 
participation.

DATES: October 5, 2012.
    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Charleston School of Law, 81 Mary Street, Charleston, SC 
29403.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Benjamin J. Robinson, Deputy Rules 
Officer and Counsel, Administrative Office of the United States Courts, 
Washington, DC 20544, telephone (202) 502-1820.

    Dated: February 21, 2012.
Benjamin J. Robinson,
Deputy Rules Officer and Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2012-4635 Filed 2-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 2210-55-P
From: david.kayes@daimler.com

To: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US@EPA Cc: brian.burton@daimler.com, donald.keski

- hynnila@daimler.com Date: 06/12/2011 12:58 PM Subject: HDV GHG rule: weight reduction credit issues

By ron: Weunderstand that Navistar has requested that the EPA (and possibly NHTSA) add 13L engines to the list of items eligible for weight reduction credits in the GHG rule. (By "credit" I mean being able to run GEM with a higher weight reduction input.) W hile we do not object to Navistar's making such a request, we want the agencies to know that Navistar has not gotten industrywide agreement for this credit. Daim ler does not support the credit. In particular, we see the idea as (1) lacking in scientific rigo r and (2) possibly self

- serving. Specifically, regarding the first point, we believe that a lot more contributes to total vehicle mass than just the bare engine weight. The full engine system weight would capture cooling s ys tem weight, aftertreatment a nd associated hardware, mounting provisions, accessories, etc. In particular, a lightweight 13L engine, operated frequently at high torque, may require a relatively heavy cooling system, the weight of which is not appropriately captured by Navistar's prop osal. Yes a 13L engine and its cooling system will likely be lighter than a 15L, but not by the amount that Navistar proposes. We would be happy to work with the agency and our industry colleagues to develop a more scientifically robust procedure for cre dits based on full system weight. W hile we are at it, we should also consider other equally valid weight savings, such as that for a reduced weight cab and cab

- mo unt assembly, a reduced weight drive train, etc. Regarding the second point, we think that a ma nufacturer who has primarily 13L engines to offer (besides two low rated 15L offerings) is trying to get a competitive advantage from the agency seal of approval that would come with this credit. For example, where a manufacturer offers no equivalent 1 5L engine rating, why should the manufacturer get credit for putting a 13L engine into the vehicle? In short, because we believe the agencies should not give competitive advantages to one manufacturer or another, we do not support the credit. One final p oint, in case we have not yet made this clear to the agencies: we think the weight reduction table, with credits for aluminum parts, needs much work before it is ready for the regulation. Many of the parts on the list ( e.g. , the hood, fairings, fan shrou d) are made of plastic or fiberglass, such that going to alum inum would increase the weight. Again, we would be happy to work with the EPA and NHTSA in developing a more robust list or, alternatively, a procedure for taking weight into account. Thanks, D ave

------------------------- David Kayes Compliance and Regulatory Affairs

--- Environmental Compliance Daim ler Trucks (503) 745

- 9162 Office (503) 265

- 9838 Mobile David.Kayes@Daimler.com If you are not the intended addressee, please inform us immediately that you have received this e

- ma il in error, and delete it. We thank you for your cooperation.
Notice of Exercise



 EXHIBIT 10.161 
 

 
 December 15, 2006 
 Pharmaco
Investments, Inc. 
 Pharmaceutical Product Development, Inc. 
 3151 S. 17th Street 
 Wilmington NC 28412 
 Attn: Fred Eshelman, CEO 
 Sent
via Electronic Mail and Federal Express 
  

			
	 Re:
	  	 Amendment No. 1 to the First Amended and Restated Royalty Stream Purchase Agreement;
 Notice of Exercise of Option to Terminate Services


 Dear Mr. Eshelman: 
 Pursuant to paragraph 5 of Amendment No. 1 to the First Amended and Restated Royalty Stream Purchase Agreement dated as of September 26, 2006 (the “Amendment”), notice is hereby given that Accentia
Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. elects to exercise its option to terminate the services of Pharmaco Investments, Inc. (“PPD”) and Pharmaceutical Products Development, Inc. (“PPDI”), effective as of the close of business on
December 28, 2006 (the “Termination Date”). 
 Please forward your invoice for the Fully-Loaded Cost incurred by PPD through
the Termination Date, as defined in the Amendment. As provided by the terms of the Amendment, upon payment of that invoice the amount of the Royalty Stream as defined in the applicable agreements shall be reduced to seven percent (7%). 

If you should have any questions with regard to this matter, please don’t hesitate to contact me. 
 Very truly yours, 
 /s/ Frank O’Donnell 
 Frank O’Donnell, M.D. 
 Chairman & CEO 
  

			
	 Cc:
	  	 Sam Duffey, Esq.
 Alan Pearce


 324 S. Hyde Park Avenue 
 Suite 350 
 Tampa, FL 33606 
 PH: (813) 864-2554 FAX: (813) 258-6912
##### 



KEY EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT PROTECTION AGREEMENT
  W I T N E S S E T H
       Operation of Agreement Effective Date provided that
 1




---



##### 



Termination of Employment Following a Potential Change of Control i ii
 Termination of Employment Following Death or Disability
 Definitions Change of Control i ii a b iii
 Potential Change of Control i ii iii iv
 Cause i nolo contendere ii
 2




---



##### 



iii
 Good Reason
 A B
 A B
     Disability
 3




---



##### 



Notice of Termination x y i ii iii
 Date of Termination i ii
 Employment Protection Benefits Basic Benefits x i ii y
     4




---



##### 



Continuation of Benefits x y
 Indemnification provided
that
 Certain Further Payments by the Company
 5




---



##### 



provided however
      6




---



##### 



Adjustments to the Tax Reimbursement Payment
  Discharge of the Companys Obligations
 7




---



##### 



Legal Fees and Expenses provided
that
 Successors
 Miscellaneous Applicable Law
 Arbitration
 Entire Agreement
 8




---



##### 



Notices
 If to the Executive:
    
    at the home address of the Executive noted on the
records of the CompanyIf to the Company:
    
    Landstar System, Inc.13410 Sutton Park Drive SouthJacksonville, Florida 32224Attn.: General Counsel
   LANDSTAR SYSTEM, INC.By:
    /s/Name:Title:   ___________________________   9
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 40 (Wednesday, February 29, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12304-12305]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4815]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Notice of Proposals To Engage in or To Acquire Companies Engaged 
in Permissible Nonbanking Activities

    The companies listed in this notice have given notice under section 
4 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843) (BHC Act) and 
Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225) to engage de novo, or to acquire or 
control voting securities or assets of a company, including the 
companies listed below, that engages either directly or through a 
subsidiary or other company, in a nonbanking activity that is listed in 
Sec.  225.28 of Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.28) or that the Board has 
determined by Order to be closely related to banking and permissible 
for bank holding companies. Unless otherwise noted, these activities 
will be conducted throughout the United States.
    Each notice is available for inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank 
indicated. The notice also will be available for inspection at the 
offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their 
views in writing on the question whether the proposal complies with the 
standards of section 4 of the BHC Act.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding the applications must be 
received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of 
Governors not later than March 15, 2012.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of New York (Ivan Hurwitz, Vice President), 
33 Liberty Street, New York, New York 10045-0001:
    1. Danske Bank A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark; to engage de novo through 
its subsidiary, Danske Markets Inc., New York, New York, in securities 
brokerage

[[Page 12305]]

activities, pursuant to section 225.28(b)(7)(i).

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, February 24, 
2012.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2012-4815 Filed 2-28-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
```

                                                                    Exhibit 99.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

  Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.ss.1350)

Pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 (18  U.S.C.ss.1350),
the  undersigned,  Gregg F. Stewart,  Chief  Financial  Officer of NuCo2 Inc., a
Florida  corporation  (the  "Company"),  does hereby certify,  to his knowledge,
that:

The Annual  Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal  year ended June 30,  2002 of the
Company (the "Report") fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934, and the information  contained in
the Report fairly presents,  in all material respects,  the financial  condition
and results of operations of the Company.

                                                /s/ Gregg F. Stewart
                                                -------------------------
                                                Gregg F. Stewart
                                                Chief Financial Officer
                                                September 30, 2002
```