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

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 115

Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding United States citizens killed

in terrorist attacks in Israel.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 10, 1999

Mr. ASHCROFT (for himself, Mr. SHELBY, Mr. SCHUMER, Mr. BURNS, Mr.

KYL, and Mr. SPECTER) submitted the following resolution; which was

referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding United States

citizens killed in terrorist attacks in Israel.

Whereas the Palestinian Authority, in formal commitments

made under the Oslo peace process, repeatedly has

pledged to wage a relentless campaign against terrorism;

Whereas at least 12 United States citizens have been killed

in terrorist attacks in Israel since the Oslo process began

in 1993, and full cooperation from the Palestinian Authority regarding these cases has not been forthcoming;

Whereas at least 280 Israeli citizens have died in terrorist attacks since the Oslo process began, a greater loss of life

than in the 15 years prior to 1993;

Whereas the Palestinian Authority has released terrorist suspects repeatedly, and suspects implicated in the murder
2

•SRES 115 IS

of United States citizens have found shelter in the Palestinian Authority, even serving in the Palestinian police

force;

Whereas the Palestinian Authority uses official institutions

such as the Palestinian Broadcasting Corporation to

train Palestinian children to hate the Jewish people; and

Whereas terrorist violence likely will undermine a genuine

peace settlement and jeopardize the security of Israel and

United States citizens in that country as long as incitement against the Jewish people and the State of Israel

continues: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that—

2 (1) it is the solemn duty of the United States

3 and every Administration to bring to justice those

4 suspected of murdering United States citizens in

5 acts of terrorism;

6 (2) the Palestinian Authority has not taken

7 adequate steps to undermine and eradicate terrorism

8 and has not cooperated fully in detaining and pros9 ecuting suspects implicated in the murder of United

10 States citizens;

11 (3) Yasser Arafat and senior Palestinian leader12 ship continue to create an environment conducive to

13 terrorism by releasing terrorist suspects and inciting

14 violence against Israel and the United States; and

15 (4) United States assistance to the Palestinian

16 Authority should be conditioned on full cooperation
3

•SRES 115 IS

1 in combating terrorist violence and full cooperation

2 in investigating and prosecuting terrorist suspects

3 involved in the murder of United States citizens.

Æ
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 quarterly report of Stereotaxis, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31,
2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Daniel J. Johnston, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18
of the United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of 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 results of
operations of the Company.



|                     |  |                        
|-------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Date: August 6, 2010 |  | /s/ Daniel J. Johnston 
|                     |  | Daniel J. Johnston     
|                     |  | Chief Financial Officer
|                     |  | Stereotaxis, Inc.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000846732
<NAME>                        Omni U.S.A., Inc.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUL-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                             587,044
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,231,091
<ALLOWANCES>                                        80,000
<INVENTORY>                                      4,103,840
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 7,921,552
<PP&E>                                           4,174,896
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,071,293
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  10,240,977
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,421,599
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                            18,384
<OTHER-SE>                                       3,338,758
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    10,240,977
<SALES>                                         20,711,891
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                20,711,891
<CGS>                                           15,569,592
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   19,758,563
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    95,598
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 415,153
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    442,577
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                442,577
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                       442,577
<EPS-BASIC>                                           0.12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0.12



</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 31.2
         CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
         ---------------------------------------------------------------

     I, Au E-Mun hereby certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10Q-SB of Thai One On,
Inc. and its wholly-owned Subsidiary, Thai Pasta Enterprise Sdn. Bhd.

2. Based on my knowledge, the quarterly 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 the quarterly report.

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

4. The other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing
and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) and we have:

a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
    material information relating to Thai One On, Inc., including
    its subsidiaries, if any, is made known to us by others within
    those entities, particularly during the period in which this
    quarterly report is being prepared;

b)  evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and
    procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the
    filing date of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c)  presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
    effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on
    our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5.  The other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to our auditors and the audit committee of our
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a)  that there were no significant deficiencies in the design or
    operation of internal controls which could adversely affect our
    ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data
    and have further advised our auditors that there we are not aware
    of any material weaknesses in our internal controls; and

b)  that there was no fraud, whether or not material, that involved
    our management or other employees who have a significant role in
    our internal controls; and

6.  The other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly
that there were no significant changes in internal controls or in other
factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to
the date of our most recent evaluation.

                                   THAI ONE ON, INC., Registrant

Dated: May 13, 2005.               /s/ Au E-Mun
                                   -------------------------------------
                                   By: Au E-Mun, Chief Financial Officer,
                                   Treasurer, Principal Accounting
                                   Officer and Director
#### STATE TAX COMMISSION OF UTAH, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. James M. LOONEY, Defendant and Appellant.

No. 19913.

Supreme Court of Utah.

Jan. 29, 1985.

James M. Looney, pro se.

David L. Wilkinson, Atty. Gen., James L. Barker, Jr., Gary R. Thorup, Stephen Schwendiman, Mary Beth Walz, Asst. At-tys. Gen., Salt Lake City, for plaintiff and respondent.

PER CURIAM:

Defendant appeals from an order of the district court holding him in contempt of a “writ of mandate” that required him to file tax returns for the years 1979, 1980, and 1981.

Defendant first challenges the appropriateness of a writ of mandate as the procedure to compel him to file a tax return. U:C.A., 1953, § 59-31-7(1) clearly provides that “[i]f a taxpayer fails to file any return required ..., the state tax commission may petition for a writ of mandate to compel the taxpayer to file_” Defendant argues that mandamus is normally' used only to compel a public officer to perform his duty. In so arguing, defendant confuses the extraordinary writ of mandamus with the statutory writ of mandate. The two procedures are to be distin*1207guished, and the limitations on the former do not necessarily apply to the latter.1

Defendant next urges that he need not comply with the requirement to file a tax return, since he owes no duty to the state. In a related argument, defendant challenges the “state’s jurisdiction.” While his argument is less than clear, it appears that this jurisdictional challenge is directed to the tax commission’s authority to require citizens to file income tax returns. At the hearing on the order to show cause, defendant conceded the district court’s jurisdiction and attacked “only the state’s authority ... to bring this action in the first place.” Article XIII, section 12 of the Utah Constitution authorizes the legislature to impose a tax based on income. Pursuant to this constitutional authority, the legislature enacted the Individual Income Tax Act (contained in Title 59 of the Utah Code). Clearly, the state has the authority to impose on its citizens certain duties, including the filing of tax returns.

The only returns ever filed by defendant for the years in question contained zeros in all the appropriate blanks for reporting income. While conceding that he had wages for the years in question, defendant argues that wages are merely compensation for services and not income. The argument is totally without merit. *See Joslin v. United States,*666 F.2d 1306 (10th Cir.1981).

Finally, defendant claims the order of the district court violated his constitutional rights. Without specifying how he has been deprived of his rights, defendant cites the first, fourth, fifth, and fourteenth amendments of the Constitution of the United States. Having considered all of defendant’s constitutional arguments, we find that there is no legal or factual merit to any of them.

Affirmed.

1

. *Mitchell v. Agents of State,*105 Idaho 419, 670 P.2d 520 (1983); *Department of Revenue v. McCann,*293 Or. 522, 651 P.2d 717 (1982).
**Exhibit 32.2****CERTIFICATIONS**     In connection with the Quarterly Report of CNX Gas Corporation (the “Registrant”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ending March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the “Report”), I, Mark D. Gibbons, Chief Financial Officer (principal financialofficer) of the Registrant, certify that to my knowledge, based upon a review of the Report:     (i) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and     (ii) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.Date:April 27, 2007       /s/ Mark D. Gibbons         **Mark D. Gibbons**    **Chief Financial Officer**
2012 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

12-3-2012

USA v. Joseph Passalaqua

Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential

Docket No. 11-4244

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2012

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2012 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"USA v. Joseph Passalaqua" (2012). 2012 Decisions. Paper 84.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2012/84
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

No. 11-4244

United States v. Passalaqua

ORDER

At the direction of the Court, the opinion and judgment filed November 29, 2012 

are hereby vacated. The case will be submitted to a reconstituted merits panel for 

disposition.

For the Court,

/s/ Marcia M. Waldron

Clerk

Dated: December 3, 2012

JK/cc: Mark E. Coyne, Esq.

David W. Feder, Esq.

K. Anthony Thomas, Esq.
106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. CON. RES. 160

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives

2 concurring), That when the Senate recesses or adjourns

3 at the close of business on Thursday, November 2, 2000,

4 or on Monday, November 6, 2000, on a motion offered

5 pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its Majority

6 Leader or his designee, it stand recessed or adjourned

7 until noon on Tuesday, November 14, 2000, or until such

8 time on that day as may be specified by its Majority Lead9 er or his designee in the motion to recess or adjourn, or

10 until noon on the second day after Members are notified

11 to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent res12 olution, whichever occurs first; and that when the House

13 adjourns on the legislative day of Thursday, November 2,

14 2000, Friday, November 3, 2000, Saturday, November 4,

15 2000, Sunday, November 5, 2000, Monday, November 6,

16 2000, Tuesday, November 7, 2000, Wednesday, November

17 8, 2000, or Thursday, November 9, 2000, on a motion

18 offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its Ma19 jority Leader or his designee, it stand adjourned until 2:00
2

SCON 160 ES

1 p.m. on Monday, November 13, 2000, or until noon on

2 the second day after Members are notified to reassemble

3 pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, which4 ever occurs first.

5 SEC. 2. The Majority Leader of the Senate and the

6 Speaker of the House, acting jointly after consultation

7 with the Minority Leader of the Senate and the Minority

8 Leader of the House, shall notify the Members of the Sen9 ate and House, respectively, to reassemble whenever, in

10 their opinion, the public interest shall warrant it.

Passed the Senate November 2 (legislative day, September 22), 2000.

Attest:

Secretary.
106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. CON. RES. 160

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Providing for a conditional adjournment or recess

of the Senate and a conditional adjournment ofthe House of Representatives.
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 57 (Friday, March 23, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 17080]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7092]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human 
Development; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
    Name of Committee: National Institute of Child Health and Human 
Development Special Emphasis Panel; ZHD1 DSR-K LR 1.
    Date: April 16, 2012.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 12 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6100 Executive Boulevard, 
Rockville, MD 20852 (Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Sathasiva B. Kandasamy, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, Division of Scientific Review, National Institute of Child 
Health and Human Development, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 
20892-9304, (301) 435-6680, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d9aab2b8b7bdb8aab899b4b8b0b5f7b7b0b1f7beb6af"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f4879f959a90958795b499959d98da9a9d9cda939b82">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, 
Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 
93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, 
Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National 
Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: March 19, 2012.
Jennifer S. Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012-7092 Filed 3-22-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### Glenda Schubert D’SPAIN v. James L. D’SPAIN.

No. 87-CC-0725.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 9, 1987.

In re D’Spain, Glenda Schubert; applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, Nos. 87-0 222, 87-C-245; Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court, Div. “F”, No. 302-816.

Granted. See order entered in 87-CO 0693 which applies herein also.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markm an Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_________________________________________ Clerk December 26, 2012

s1217 

# Order

December 26, 2012

146135

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 146135

COA: 305964

Kent CC: 11

- 001091

- FH

EDWARD ALLAN PROCTOR,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 20, 2012

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S.J. Res. 40 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

  2d Session
S. J. RES. 40

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
 Providing for the appointment of Alan G. Spoon as a citizen regent of 
          the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That, in accordance with 
section 5581 of the Revised Statutes of the United States (20 U.S.C. 
43), the vacancy on the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian 
Institution, in the class other than Members of Congress, occurring by 
reason of resignation of Louis Gerstner of New York, is filled by the 
appointment of Alan G. Spoon of Maryland. The appointment is for a term 
of 6 years and shall take effect on the date of enactment of this joint 
resolution.

            Passed the Senate April 12, 2000.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
106th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                             S. J. RES. 40

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 Providing for the appointment of Alan G. Spoon as a citizen regent of 
          the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution.
```
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2453 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2453

    To extend the temporary suspension of duty on phosphoric acid, 
                 lanthanum salt, cerium terbium-doped.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 29, 2009

  Mr. Cornyn 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 phosphoric acid, 
                 lanthanum salt, cerium terbium-doped.

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

SECTION 1. PHOSPHORIC ACID, LANTHANUM SALT, CERIUM TERBIUM-DOPED.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.10.77 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to phosphoric acid, lanthanum 
salt, cerium terbium-doped) 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>
```