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

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 992 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 992

     To provide technical amendments related to the Vaccine Injury 
                        Compensation Trust Fund.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 10, 1999

  Mr. Daschle introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To provide technical amendments related to the Vaccine Injury 
                        Compensation Trust Fund.

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

SECTION 1. TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS RELATED TO VACCINE INJURY COMPENSATION 
              TRUST FUND.

    (a) Repeal of Mutually Conflicting Amendments.--
            (1) In general.--Section 1504 of Division C of the Omnibus 
        Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act, 
        1999 (relating to Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund) is 
        repealed.
            (2) Effect of repeal.--The Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
        shall be applied and administered as if the section repealed by 
        paragraph (1) had never been enacted.
    (b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 9510(c)(1) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to expenditures from Trust Fund) is 
amended--
            (1) by striking ``August 5, 1997'' in subparagraph (A) and 
        inserting ``October 21, 1998'', and
            (2) by striking ``$9,500,000'' in subparagraph (B) and 
        inserting ``$10,000,000''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (b) shall 
take effect as if included in the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency 
Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1999.
                                 <all>
```
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO  RULES 13A-15(E) AND 15D-15(E) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Birmingham Bloomfield Bancshares,
Inc.;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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented
in this report;4.
    
    The small business issuer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 small business issuer 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 small business issuer, 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.
    
    [Reserved];c.
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer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; andd.
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuers internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuers most
recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuers fourth fiscal quarter in the case of
an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business
issuers auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer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 small business issuers ability to record, process, summarize and report
financial information; andb.
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the small business issuers internal control over
financial reporting.
 November 12, 2007
 /s/ Robert E. FarrRobert E. FarrChief Executive Officer
#### FIRST STATE BANK & TRUST COMPANY OF EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH v. SEVEN GABLES, INC., H. Samuel Davidson and Bessie Mae Davidson.

No. 87-C-0200.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 13, 1987.

In re Davidson, H. Samuel; applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 85-CA-1135; Parish of Livingston, 21st Judicial District Court, Div. “A”, No. 36752.

Prior report: La.App., 501 So.2d 280.

Denied.
---

Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Icon
  Development, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended
  March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
  hereof (the Report), I, Elliot Lebowitz, Executive Officer of the
  Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 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
        results of operations of the Company.

|May 17, 2007 | /s/
      Elliot Lebowitz            
|------------ | -------------------------------------
|             | Elliot Lebowitz                      
|             | President and Chief Executive Officer
|             | (Principal Executive Officer)        

---
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2381 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain desk accessory cases with small, 

built-in amplifiers. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 29, 2009 

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

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain desk accessory 

cases with small, built-in amplifiers. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN DESK ACCESSORY CASES WITH 

4 SMALL, BUILT-IN AMPLIFIERS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

6 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

7 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

8 new heading: 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2381 IS

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Cases for desk accessories 

(provided for in subheading 

4202.92.90) with dimensions 

not exceeding approximately 

267 mm H x 153 mm W x 

77 mm D, made of ethylenevinyl acetate material covered 

in polyester fabric, having a 

three-sided zipper closure, 

with a small, battery-operated 

amplifier ................................ Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2011 ’’. 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Securities and Exchange Commission

          - [File No. 500-1]

It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of ASP Ventures Corp. because it has not filed any periodic reports since the period ended September 30, 2008.

The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the securities of the above-listed company. Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of the above-listed company is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT on March 15, 2012, through 11:59 p.m. EDT on March 28, 2012.

By the Commission.

Jill M. Peterson,

Assistant Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2012-6663 Filed 3-15-12; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2431 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2431

 To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain men's footwear.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 29, 2009

 Mr. Brownback introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain men's footwear.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN MEN'S FOOTWEAR.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.13.91 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to certain men's footwear) is 
amended by striking ``12/31/2009'' and inserting ``12/31/2011''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### Erik Hans BRAKHAGE, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MOTOR VEHICLE DIVISION, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 84CA0778.

Colorado Court of Appeals, Div. I.

Aug. 29, 1985.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 3, 1985.

Certiorari Granted Dec. 9, 1985.

No appearance for plaintiff-appellee.

Duane Woodard, Atty. Gen., Charles B. Howe, Chief Deputy Atty. Gen., Richard H. Forman, Sol. Gen., Steven M. Bush, Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for defendant-appellant.

PIERCE, Judge.

The Colorado Department of Revenue (Department) appeals the judgment of the district court which reversed the extension of a suspension order concerning the license of Erik Hans Brakhage. We affirm.

On March 8, 1982, the Department suspended Brakhage’s driver’s license, pursuant to § 42-2-123, C.R.S. At that time it issued Brakhage a probationary license. The suspension period and the probationary license were stated specifically to expire on September 7, 1982. Brakhage did not act to reinstate his license until November 17, 1982.

On October 15, 1982, Brakhage was involved in an accident and was later convicted of careless driving as a result. After his conviction, the Department held a hearing and determined that the suspension period should be extended. The basis of the extension was that his probationary license had expired on September 7, and that his license was not reinstated until November 17. Therefore, he had committed the offense, in October, of driving while under suspension.

We affirm the district court’s reversal of the Department’s determination, but for different reasons.

The district court based its ruling on *Seigneur v. Motor Vehicle Division,*674 P.2d 967 (Colo.App.1983). There, we ruled that the probationary license was valid until the licensee paid the restoration fee necessary for restoration of the suspended license where the probationary license had no stated expiration date. We stated in *Seigneur*that: “If the Department intends that a probationary license expire on a date certain, a notation to that effect must be made on the probationary license.” That admonition was followed here by the Department, and the license had a stated expiration date of September 7.

However, under the Department’s order, the suspension also expired on September 7. Therefore, Brakhage was not driving under suspension at the time of the alleged offense; rather he was driving without a *1191valid license. This offense did not constitute a proper basis to extend a suspension which has already expired under § 42-2-130(3), C.R.S.

The judgment is affirmed.

SMITH and KELLY, JJ., concur.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

- - - - - - - -

NO. 20-0816

IN THE INTEREST OF M.H. AND 

T.H., CHILDREN

§

§

§

§

§

§

Dallas County,

5th District.

December 18, 2020

Petitioner's petition for review, filed herein in the above numbered and styled case, 

having been duly considered, is ordered, and hereby is, denied.



I, BLAKE A. HAWTHORNE, Clerk of the Supreme Court of Texas, do hereby certify 

that the above is a true and correct copy of the orders of the Supreme Court of Texas in the case 

numbered and styled as above, as the same appear of record in the minutes of said Court under 

the date shown.

It is further ordered that petitioner, C.H., pay all costs incurred on this petition.

WITNESS my hand and seal of the Supreme Court of Texas, at the City of Austin, this 

the 27th day of January, 2021.

Blake A. Hawthorne, Clerk

By Monica Zamarripa, Deputy Clerk

FILE COPY
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-2402

KIMBERLY LEE, on behalf of KJL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

COMMISSIONER OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Orangeburg. J. Michelle Childs, District 

Judge. (5:14-cv-01356-JMC)

Submitted: April 29, 2016 Decided: May 18, 2016

Before WYNN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kimberly Lee, Appellant Pro Se. Marshall Prince, II, Assistant 

United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Kimberly Lee, on behalf of her minor daughter KJL, appeals 

the district court’s order accepting the magistrate judge’s 

recommendation and affirming the Commissioner’s denial of 

supplemental security income (SSI).* We have reviewed the record 

and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm 

substantially for the reasons stated by the district court. Lee 

v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., No. 5:14-cv-01356-JMC (D.S.C. 

Sept. 28, 2015). We dispense with oral argument because the 

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

AFFIRMED

 * Although we previously have recognized “that non-attorney 

parents generally may not litigate the claims of their minor 

children in federal court,” Myers v. Loudoun Cty. Pub. Sch., 418 

F.3d 395, 401 (4th Cir. 2005), we conclude that Lee is 

authorized to litigate KJL’s claims in the circumstances 

presented by this appeal from the administrative denial of SSI 

benefits, see Adams ex rel. D.J.W. v. Astrue, 659 F.3d 1297, 

1301 (10th Cir. 2011); Machadio v. Apfel, 276 F.3d 103, 107 (2d 

Cir. 2002); Harris v. Apfel, 209 F.3d 413, 417 (5th Cir. 2000).
50175.

#### ALEXANDER v. THE STATE.

Evans, Judge.

Defendant was indicted for motor vehicle theft, along with one Larry Shingles. Counsel was appointed for him on September 17,1974, and his motion for separate trials, was granted. His counsel, upon request, was provided a list of witnesses under Code Ann. § 27-1403. Counsel was on call in criminal court on September 25,1974, and while answering the court calendar he was handed a list of two additional witnesses, namely Larry Shingles and one Johnnie Mae Haynes. These witnesses were not on the original list handed to him.

On September 26, 1974, this case was called, and defendant, by and through his counsel waived a copy of the indictment (which he already had received), list of witnesses (which he had received), and waived formal arraignment before he pleaded not guilty. After the issue had been joined, he objected to the use of Shingles and Haynes as witnesses against him under authority of Code Ann. § 27-1403 and the constitutional clause upon which it is based. Counsel stated that he had been unable to properly investigate as to what these witnesses might testify (having been on trial on the day he was handed the *202names of the additional witnesses), which was just the day before. He objected to the use of these witnesses but made no request for a continuance.

Submitted February 10, 1975

Decided March 6, 1975.

*Wingate & Bartlett, Fred E. Bartlett, Jr.,*for appellant.

*William S. Lee, District Attorney, Daniel MacDougald, III, Assistant District Attorney,*for appellee.

The assistant district attorney stated in his place that he did not learn of these witnesses until the trial of Shingles which was on Tuesday afternoon. He furnished the additional list to defense counsel on Wednesday, and trial was begun on Thursday. He further stated that he realized at the trial of Shingles that these witnesses were necessary witnesses in this case. The sole appeal is to allowing these witnesses to testify against defendant. *Held:*

The Constitution of Georgia (Code Ann. § 2-105) does not state when the list of witnesses shall be furnished; but the statute (Code Ann. § 27-1403) states very clearly that the list shall be furnished previously to arraignment. The statute was complied with here because no arraignment was ever held (he waived arraignment), and the list was given to counsel the day before trial. While defendant contends he had been unable to investigate what these witnesses would testify he made no motion for a continuance but merely moved to prevent these witnesses from testifying against him. Regardless of whether or not the statement by the prosecuting attorney in his place amounts to a statement that the evidence of these two witnesses was newly-discovered, the Constitution and statute have been complied with, and no error is shown.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Deen, P. J., concurs. Stolz, J., concurs in the judgment only.*
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

 

In connection with the report of Razor Resources Inc. (the "Company"), on Form 10-QSB for the quarter endingJuly 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Rong XIn Yang, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Sect 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Sect 1350), that to my knowledge: 

 

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

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

 

/s/ Rong Xin Yang                                    

Rong Xin Yang, 

Chief Financial Officer

Dated: September 19, 2007
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                        12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               APR-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                  MAY-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                    APR-30-1999
<CASH>                                                    0
<SECURITIES>                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                             0
<ALLOWANCES>                                              0
<INVENTORY>                                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                          0
<PP&E>                                                    0
<DEPRECIATION>                                            0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                            0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                35,791
<BONDS>                                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                            437,415
<OTHER-SE>                                         (473,206)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                              0
<SALES>                                                   0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                          0
<CGS>                                                     0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                             0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                      1,040
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                        0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      (1,040)
<INCOME-TAX>                                              0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  (1,040)
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                         (1,040)
<EPS-BASIC>                                               0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                             0



</TABLE>
Exhibit
        23
 
 
 
 **CONSENT
        OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**
 
 We
        consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on
        Form
        SB-2 (Registration No. 333-117175) of Zynex Medical Holdings, Inc. of our
        report
        dated April 16, 2007, which appears on page F-1 of this annual report on
        Form
        10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2006.
 
 
 /s/
        GHP Horwath, P.C.
 
 Denver,
        Colorado
 April
        16,
        2007