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

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 116 (Wednesday, August 1, 2012)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1380-E1381]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

         IN HONOR OF THE LAWNSIDE VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY NO. 1

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. ROBERT E. ANDREWS

                             of new jersey

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, August 1, 2012

  Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Lawnside 
Volunteer Fire Company No. 1 for its tireless efforts protecting and 
serving the residents of Lawnside over the last 100 years. At this 
great milestone, I recognize the heroic work of these individuals who 
routinely place themselves in harm's way for the greater good of the 
community. These volunteers serve as vanguards of safety and stability, 
performing necessary duties that few are willing to undertake.
  Since its humble beginnings in 1912 with only a small fire hall and 
single Model T Ford, the Lawnside Volunteer Fire Company has found 
growth through determination and community initiative. Through 
fundraising and the awarding of federal grants, the Lawnside Fire 
Company steadily grew its fleet of emergency vehicles, providing 
greater lifesaving assistance to the Lawnside community. The Lawnside 
Fire Company has also gained statewide recognition as a premiere 
company, having won a series of awards at the annual New Jersey 
Firemen's Convention.
  Mr. Speaker, Lawnside Fire Company's contributions and endless 
dedication to the Lawnside community should not go unrecognized. I join 
the citizens of Lawnside and all of Camden County in honoring the 
achievements of this exceptional fire company.

[[Page E1381]]

                          ____________________
```
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-6990

CHRISTOPHER DEON GATTIS, Petitioner - Appellant,
versus SUPERINTENDENT LAWRENCE SOLOMEN, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Russell A. Eliason, Magistrate Judge. (1:06-cv-00598-RAE) Submitted: November 14, 2007 Decided: December 4, 2007 Before MOTZ, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Christopher Deon Gattis, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, Mary Carla Hollis, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.* The parties consented to exercise of jurisdiction by a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2000). - 2 - PER CURIAM: Christopher Deon Gattis seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. *The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Gattis has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We further deny Appellant’s motions for a stay pending appeal and for discretionary leave to appeal. 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. DISMISSED
# C_2011055EN.01000301.xml

| 19.2.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 55/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.2.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 55/3

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 16 December 2010 — Kahla/Thüringen Porzellan GmbH v Freistaat Thüringen, Federal Republic of Germany, European Commission

(Case C-537/08 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - State aid - Commission decision finding aid to be incompatible with the common market and ordering its recovery - Principles of legal certainty and of the protection of legitimate expectations)

2011/C 55/04

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Kahla/Thüringen Porzellan GmbH (represented by: M. Schütte, S. Zühlke and P. Werner, Rechtsanwälte)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings: Freistaat Thüringen (represented by: A. Weitbrecht and M. Núñez Müller, Rechtsanwälte), Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: M. Lumma and W. D. Plessing, acting as Agents), European Commission (represented by: V. Kreuschitz and K. Gross, acting as Agents, assisted by C. Koenig, professor)

Other parties to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 24 September 2008 in Case T-20/03 Kahla/Thüringen Porzellan GmbH, by which the Court of First Instance dismissed an action for the annulment of Commission Decision 2003/643/EC of 13 May 2003 on the State aid implemented by Germany for Kahla Porzellan GmbH and Kahla/Thüringen Porzellan GmbH (OJ 2003 L 227, p. 12), in so far as that decision concerns the financial assistance granted to Kahla/Thüringen Porzellan GmbH — Infringement of the principles of legal certainty and protection of legitimate expectations

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Kahla Thüringen Porzellan GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Kahla Thüringen Porzellan GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 44, 21.2.2009.

1

---
<PAGE>

Exhibit 99.1


                            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 Quarterly Report of Forsale.com, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2002, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of the undersigned's
knowledge, 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.



08/19/2002                                 /s/ Sahra Partida
---------------                            -------------------------------------
Date                                       President and Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit
32.2





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT


18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Ralph
Peterson, Chief Financial Officer of Command Center, Inc.  (the
"Company") do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my
knowledge:





This
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended March
27, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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.






Date:  May
      17, 2010/s/
      Ralph PetersonRalph
      PetersonChief
      Financial Officer
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

Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted  pursuant  to  Section  906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this
Quarterly  Report  on  Form  10-Q  for  the  quarter  ended  June 30, 2008 fully
complies  with  the  requirements  of  Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange  Act  of 1934, as amended, and the information contained in such report
fairly  presents,  in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of  operations  of  the  Company.

This 11th day of August, 2008.

/s/ R. Daniel Blanton
---------------------
R. Daniel Blanton
President &
Chief Executive Officer
(Principal executive officer)

/s/ Darrell R. Rains
---------------------
Darrell R. Rains
Group Vice President &
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal financial officer)
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 164 (Friday, August 23, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 52513]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-20693]

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

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting; Cancellation

AGENCY: U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission.

FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION OF PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT:  Vol. 78, No. 162, 
Wednesday, August 21, 2013, page 51713.

ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE OF MEETING: Wednesday, August 21, 2013, 10 
a.m.-11 a.m.

MEETING CANCELED. For a recorded message containing the latest agenda 
information, call (301) 504-7948.

CONTACT PERSON FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Todd A. Stevenson, Office of 
the Secretary, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814 (301) 504-
7923.

    Dated: August 21, 2013.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-20693 Filed 8-21-13; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
```
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 108 (Wednesday, July 18, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H4911]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                   DESIGNATION OF SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following 
communication from the Speaker:

                                               Washington, DC,

                                                    July 18, 2012.
       I hereby appoint the Honorable Jean Schmidt to act as 
     Speaker pro tempore on this day.
                                                  John A. Boehner,
     Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                          ____________________
```
(July 11, 1991)

#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v James C. Mullen, Appellant.

Per Curiam.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County (Harris, J.), rendered April 28, 1981, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

When this appeal was previously before us (152 AD2d 260), we withheld decision and remitted to County Court for hearings on whether the electronic surveillance evidence against defendant obtained pursuant to an eavesdropping warrant should be suppressed and whether a certain statement of defendant to a Federal Drug Enforcement Administration agent should be suppressed both as evidence-in-chief and for impeachment purposes.

The hearings we directed were held by County Court, following which the court rendered its decision in writing. Upon review of the record of those proceedings and further argument, we agree with County Court’s resolution of the issues. Notably, County Court correctly concluded that the People failed, as a matter of law, to establish good cause for not complying with the requirements of CPL 700.70 and that such failure requires the suppression of the wiretap evidence *(see, People v Schulz,*67 NY2d 144).

Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Weiss, Levine and Mercure, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, motion to suppress evidence obtained through the eavesdropping warrant granted, and matter remitted to the County Court of Albany County for further proceedings not inconsistent with this court’s decision.
EXHIBIT
31.1




Certification
of Chief Executive Officer


Pursuant
to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


and
Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934




I, Dennis
P. Calvert, certify that:




1. I have
reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of BioLargo, 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 registrant as of, and
for, the periods presented in this report;




4. The
registrant’s other certifying officer 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 registrant 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 registrant, 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 registrant’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 registrant’s internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal
quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and




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





Date: August
      16, 2010
            
            
            
            By:
            
            /s/
      DENNIS P. CALVERTDennis
      P. CalvertChief
      Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND THE CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS
OF OPERATIONS FOUND IN THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           1,223
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   39,393
<ALLOWANCES>                                       535
<INVENTORY>                                     29,766
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                73,188
<PP&E>                                          15,990
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,859
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  88,806
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           47,345
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        60,570
<OTHER-SE>                                    (19,555)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    88,806
<SALES>                                        118,242
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               124,794
<CGS>                                           94,652
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  129,238
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 214
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,928)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        88
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,016)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,016)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.17)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.17)


</TABLE>
Request for Services to Transport, Store, and/or Dispose of Seized or Forfeited Shipments

2. Description of Commodity

 (example: rough-sawn lumber )

1. Seizure Number

 (see Forfeiture Number/Port File Number)

3. Quantity and Unit

 list lumber in cubic meters; list veneer in square meters

 (examples: 340 cubic meters; 100 square meters; 250 cartons, 40 boxes; 1,500 dowels;

 10,000 pieces in 250 boxes; 45 pieces on 15 pallets)

4. Common Name of Wood

5. Scientific Name of Wood

6. Country of Origin 7. Weight in Kilograms

Width Height

9. Value of Shipment $

8. Dimensions of the Shipment

 measure as one unit, then enter the length, width, and

 height in feet to determine the truck size needed to

 transport the shipment

Length

 10 a. Is the shipment on pallets? YES NO

10b. If YES, are pallets part of the shipment? YES NO

11. Location of Seized Material

 name of the facility and complete address

12. CBP or PPQ Point-of-Contact

 name and phone number

14. Amount the dock, pier, or warehouse will

 continue to charge on a daily basis $

13. Storage Charges Accrued-to-date $

CBP PPQ

15. Date the Forfeited Property Valued at $10,000 or Less can Be Disposed

 must be the date PPQ Form 627 was sent plus 60 days and not before

 If forfeited property is greater than $10,000 value, then PPQ Headquarters will notify the contractor of the disposal date
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

WONSUN SUH; HAEHWA SUH;

SEUNGMI SUH, a.k.a. Judy Mi Suh;

SEUNGEUN SUH, a.k.a. Seung Fun Seo;

SEUNGCHAN SUH, a.k.a. Seung Chan

Seo; SEUNGYUN SUH, a.k.a. Seung Yun

Suh,

 Petitioners,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER JR., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 06-72984

Agency Nos. A072-970-598

A072-970-599

A072-970-600

A072-970-601

A072-970-602

A072-970-603

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted March 12, 2010** 

San Francisco, California

Before: WALLACE, GRABER, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.

FILED

MAR 17 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2

Wonsun Suh, Haehwa Suh, Seungmi Suh, Seungeun Suh, Seungchan Suh,

and Seungyun Suh (together, “the Suhs”), all natives and citizens of South Korea,

petition for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”)

ordering their removal. The Suhs number among several individuals identified by

the government as having allegedly received their lawful permanent resident

(“LPR”) status through the fraudulent scheme of Leland Sustaire, a former

Supervisory Adjudications Officer of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

We deny the petition for review. First, substantial evidence supports the

BIA’s finding of removability by clear and convincing evidence. See

Hernandez-Guadarrama v. Ashcroft, 394 F.3d 674, 679 (9th Cir. 2005). 

Second, the BIA’s refusal to consider the Suhs’ green cards as “immigrant

visas” for the purpose of seeking a waiver of inadmissibility under 8 U.S.C. §

1184(k) does not violate equal protection. Rather, the government has proffered

“facially legitimate and bona fide reason[s]” for why Congress would treat LPRs,

like the Suhs, who have adjusted status within the United States, differently from

individuals holding immigrant visas and seeking admission from abroad. See

Taniguchi v. Schultz, 303 F.3d 950, 957 (9th Cir. 2002) (internal quotation marks

omitted).
3

Third, because the Suhs did not raise their equitable estoppel claim in their

opening brief, we deem it waived and decline to address it on the merits. See

Collins v. City of San Diego, 841 F.2d 337, 339 (9th Cir. 1998).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.