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

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 118 (Friday, August 3, 2012)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1428]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                HONORING THE KIDS JUST WANT TO RIDE ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. DENNY REHBERG

                               of montana

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, August 2, 2012

  Mr. REHBERG. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of the upcoming one-
year anniversary of the Kids Just Want to Ride Act being signed into 
law. This bill, which I authored to end enforcement of an overreaching 
prohibition of lead in youth-sized ATVs, motorcycles and snowmobiles, 
was added to a larger piece of legislation that was signed into law on 
August 12, 2011.
   When Congress passed a law banning lead from children's toys, no one 
thought that those enforcing the law would expand the definition of 
``toy'' to include youth-size ATVs, motorcycles and snowmobiles. But 
over the strong protests of riders and their advocates, Washington 
bureaucrats forced youth-sized ATVs and motorcycles to be pulled off 
showroom floors. All this did was force our kids to ride more dangerous 
adult-sized vehicles, putting them at extreme risk.
   This just didn't make sense. I authored the Kids Just Want to Ride 
Act so that this issue would be solved legislatively once and for all, 
but I didn't do it on my own. An amazing community of youth riders, 
their parents, and those who love youth racing and recreational 
activities backed me up with letters, phone calls, and visits to 
Washington, DC, to rally for the bill. I was honored to be included in 
the riding community and continue to be impressed by their love for 
sport and for their fellow riders.
   Mr. Speaker, I am again honored to celebrate the one-year 
anniversary of the Kids Just Want to Ride Act, and thank you for the 
opportunity to celebrate the amazing American riding community that 
rallied behind it.

                          ____________________
```
# C_2010037EN.01003702.xml

| 13.2.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.2.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/37

---

Order of the General Court of 16 December 2009 — Cattin v Commission

(Case T-194/08) (1)

1

(Non-contractual liability - EDF - List of exporters eligible to receive payment of debts owed to them by the Central African Republic - Not included on the list - Limitation period - Inadmissibility)

2010/C 37/51

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicants: R. Cattin & Cie (Bimbo, Central African Republic); and Yves Cattin (Cadiz, Spain) (represented by: B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Bordes, Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action for damages seeking compensation for the loss allegedly suffered by the applicants following a Commission decision not to include them on the list of exporters eligible to receive payment, via funds of the European Development Fund (EDF), in respect of the debts owed to them by a State body of the Central African Republic

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.

| 2. | R. Cattin & Cie and Yves Cattin shall bear their own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

R. Cattin & Cie and Yves Cattin shall bear their own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 197, 2.8.2008.

1

---
Exhibit 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
  (a)
    
    The Form 10-K of the Company for the period ended December 31, 2009 filed on the date
hereof 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(b)
    
    Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Date: February 26, 2010
    By:
    /s/ Thomas H. LowderThomas H. LowderChief Executive Officer
# C_2008327EN.01001201.xml

| 20.12.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 327/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 327/12

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Berlin (Germany) lodged on 23 September 2008 — Yasar Erdil v Land Berlin

(Case C-420/08)

(2008/C 327/20)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Berlin

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Yasar Erdil

Applicant:

Defendant: Land Berlin

Defendant:

Question referred

Can a Turkish national whose legal status is derived from the second indent of the first paragraph of Article 7 of Decision No 1/80 of the Association Council of 19 September 1980 on the development of the Association between the European Economic Community and Turkey and who has lived in Germany since his birth in 1989 rely on the special protection against expulsion under Article 28(3)(a) of Directive 2004/38/EC (1) of 29 April 2004?

1

---

(1)  Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States, amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC (OJ 2004 L 158, p. 77). (Corrigendum to Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States, amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC (OJ 2004 L 229, p. 35)).

1

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. AF 07-0110

______________

IN RE REVISIONS TO THE )

UNIFORM DISTRICT COURT RULES ) O R D E R

)

_____________

Following submission to the Court of a comment letter from CompuLaw, “the Court 

Rules Company,” and the Court’s referral of that letter to the Uniform District Court Rules 

Commission, the Commission has recommended that changes be made to Uniform District

Court Rule 2 for purposes of clarification. We approve the proposed minor changes.

THEREFORE,

IT IS ORDERED that subsections (a) and (e) of Uniform District Court Rule 2 are 

revised as follows. Subsections (a) and (e) are set forth below with new language 

underlined; language deleted is interlineated:

(a) Upon filing a motion or within five days thereafter, the moving party shall 

file a brief. The brief may be accompanied by appropriate supporting 

documents. Within ten days thereafter after service of the movant’s brief, the 

adverse opposing party shall file an answer brief which also may be 

accompanied by appropriate supporting documents. Within ten days thereafter 

after service of the opposing party’s answer brief, the movant may file a reply 

brief or other appropriate responsive documents.

. . . . .

(e) In the event of conflict, the Montana Rules of Civil Procedure shall 

control. Time computation shall be governed by Rule 6(a), M. R. Civ. P.

The Clerk is directed to provide copies of this order to the State Law Library, all 

District Court Judges of the State of Montana, each member of the Uniform District Court 

Rules Commission, the State Bar of Montana, Thomson-Reuters, CompuLaw, and Lee 

Heiman at the Montana Legislative Services Division.

DATED this 19th day of July, 2011.

July 19 2011
2

/S/ MIKE McGRATH

/S/ BETH BAKER

/S/ PATRICIA COTTER

/S/ MICHAEL E WHEAT

/S/ BRIAN MORRIS

/S/ JAMES C. NELSON

/S/ JIM RICE
Flint Creek Environmental Controls Costs

10/21/11 - Rev.4 $/Year $/Year 2.2 O&M

Variable $6.62 $4.19 Fixed $4.21 Total O&M $15.02 NID
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 115 (Tuesday, July 31, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Page S5726]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                     6-MONTH CONTINUING RESOLUTION

  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, agreeing to put the government on 
autopilot for 6 months is no great achievement. It simply means more 
drift. It means a longer period of uncertainty for government agencies 
and the people they serve, more spending on ineffective programs and 
outdated priorities, and inadequate investment in programs that merit 
additional resources.
  My preference is that we complete our work and make specific spending 
choices based on the relative merits of government programs. There is 
no excuse for the Senate not to be considering the appropriations 
bills. Our committee members have done the work of scrutinizing 
budgets, holding hearings, and drafting bills. Those bills deserve to 
be considered by the Senate, negotiated with the House and sent to the 
President as soon as possible.
  I congratulate the distinguished chairman of our Committee on 
Appropriations, Mr. Inouye, for his dependable leadership on getting us 
to this point. I look forward to continuing our efforts to extend our 
appropriations authority for the balance of the fiscal year.

                          ____________________
```
# C_2011030EN.01005902.xml

| 29.1.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 30/59 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.1.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 30/59

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 9 December 2010 — Vandeuren v European Training Foundation (ETF)

(Case F-88/08) (1)

1

(Civil service - Staff of the European Training Foundation - Temporary Agent - Contract of unlimited duration - Dismissal - Requirement to provide a valid reason - Abolition of a post - Duty of care - Reallocation)

2011/C 30/111

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Monique Vandeuren (Pino Torinese, Italy) (represented initially by N. Lhoest, lawyer, and subsequently by N. Lhoest and L. Delhaye, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Training Foundation (ETF) (represented by: T. Ciccarone, Agent, and L. Levi, lawyer)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Civil service — Annul the defendant’s decision to dismiss the applicant, and order the European Foundation to provide compensation for the pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage suffered by the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

| 1. | Annuls the decision to dismiss Ms Vandeuren of 23 October 2007; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision to dismiss Ms Vandeuren of 23 October 2007;

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders the European Training Foundation (ETF) to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the European Training Foundation (ETF) to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 327, 20.12.2008, p. 44.

1

---
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4314 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to provide for the temporary halt 

in pension payments for Members of Congress sentenced for certain 

offenses, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 8, 2017 

Ms. TENNEY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on 

Oversight and Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions 

as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to provide for the 

temporary halt in pension payments for Members of Congress sentenced for certain offenses, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘No Pensions for Cor5 rupt Politicians Act of 2017’’. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4314 IH

1 SEC. 2. FORFEITURE OF PENSION. 

2 Section 8332(o) of title 5, United States Code, is 

3 amended by adding at the end the following: 

4 ‘‘(7)(A) Subject to subparagraph (B), an individual 

5 convicted of an offense described in paragraph (2) shall 

6 not, between the date of sentencing and the date of final 

7 conviction for such offense, be eligible to receive any pay8 ment of an annuity pursuant to the retirement system 

9 under this subchapter or chapter 84, except that this sen10 tence applies only to such payments based on service ren11 dered as a Member (irrespective of when rendered). 

12 ‘‘(B) If the conviction of an individual described in 

13 subparagraph (A) is held to be invalid, such individual 

14 shall receive payments that such individual would have re15 ceived but for application of subparagraph (A). 

16 ‘‘(C) The provisions of this paragraph only apply to 

17 a conviction that occurs after the date of enactment of 

18 this paragraph.’’. 

Æ 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 8

List of Principal Subsidiaries of Sinopec Shanghai Petrochemical Company Limited



|                                                              |  |                        |     |  |                           |  |        | 
|------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------- | --- |  | ------------------------- |  | ------ | 
|Subsidiary Name                                               |  | Place of Incorporation |     |  | Our ownership interest(%) | 
|                                                              |  |                       
|Shanghai Petrochemical Investment Development Company Limited |  |                        | PRC |  |                           |  | 100.00 | 
|China Jinshan Associated Trading Corporation                  |  |                        | PRC |  |                           |  | 67.33  | 
|Shanghai Jinchang Engineering Plastics Company Limited        |  |                        | PRC |  |                           |  | 74.25  | 
|Shanghai Golden Phillips Petrochemical Company Limited        |  |                        | PRC |  |                           |  | 60.00  | 
|Zhejiang Jin Yong Acrylic Fiber Company Limited               |  |                        | PRC |  |                           |  | 75.00  | 
|Shanghai Jinshan Trading Corporation                          |  |                        | PRC |  |                           |  | 67.33  | 
|Shanghai Golden Conti Petrochemical Company Limited           |  |                        | PRC |  |                           |  | 100.00 |
EXHIBIT 31.1

                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                       AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Gary M. De Laurentiis,  Chief Executive Officer of Itec  Environmental  Group
Inc. certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB/A of Itec Environmental
Group Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual 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 annual 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-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

     a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 annual report is being
     prepared;

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

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

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

     a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
     controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
     process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
     registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

     b) any fraud,  whether or not material,  that involves  management or other
     employees  who  have  a  significant  role  in  the  registrant's  internal
     controls; and

6. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have indicated in this annual
report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in other
factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date
of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

/s/ Gary M. De Laurentiis
-------------------------
Gary M. De Laurentiis
Date: February 26, 2004
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-12-00865-CR

Timothy A. WALKER,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. 12-0765-CR

Honorable Gary L. Steel, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Delivered and Filed: March 6, 2013

DISMISSED

Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, appellant Timothy A. Walker pled guilty to 

evading arrest with a vehicle, enhanced. The trial court imposed sentence and signed a 

certificate stating that this “is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” 

See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). After appellant timely filed a notice of appeal, the clerk sent 

copies of the certification and notice of appeal to this court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(e). The 

clerk’s record, which includes the plea bargain agreement and the trial court’s Rule 25.2(a)(2) 

certification, has been filed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). 
04-12-00865-CR

- 2 -

The clerk’s record establishes the punishment assessed by the court does not exceed the 

punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant and that the trial 

court denied permission to appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). After reviewing the clerk’s 

record, the trial court’s certification therefore appears to accurately reflect that this is a plea 

bargain case and appellant does not have a right to appeal. See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610 

(Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (holding that court of appeals should review clerk’s record to determine 

whether trial court’s certification is accurate). This court must dismiss an appeal “if a 

certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the 

record.” TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d).

On January 25, 2013, we gave appellant notice that the appeal would be dismissed unless 

an amended trial court certification showing he has the right to appeal has been made part of the 

appellate record by February 25, 2013. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); 37.1; Daniels v. State, 110 

S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, order), disp. on merits, No. 04-03-00176-CR, 2003 

WL 21508347 (July 2, 2003, pet. ref’d) (not designated for publication). An amended 

certification showing appellant has the right to appeal has not been filed. We therefore dismiss 

this appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d).

PER CURIAM

Do Not Publish
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Perry King, Appellant.

Yesawich Jr., J.

Appeal from a *412judgment of the County Court of Washington County (Berke, J.), rendered February 7, 1990, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of five counts of the crime of attempted assault in the second degree.

Defendant, an inmate at Great Meadow Correctional Facility in Washington County, pleaded guilty to five counts of attempted assault in the second degree in satisfaction of a 12-count indictment charging him with 10 counts of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05 [3]), criminal mischief and promoting prison contraband in the first degree.

It is legally impossible to commit the crime of attempted assault in the second degree *(see, People v Campbell,*72 NY2d 602, 605) and, because it is not a crime, it cannot be a lesser included offense *(see,*CPL 1.20 [37]; 220.20). While County Court thus lacked authority to accept this plea (CPL 220.10 [4] [b]; *see, People v Williams,*44 AD2d 216, 217-218; *see also, People v Sicurella,*149 AD2d 983; *People v Scott,*58 AD2d 661), defendant’s acquiescence in the plea waived his right to complain of this infirmity *(see, People v Ford,*62 NY2d 275, 283; *People v Liguori,*106 AD2d 404).

Mahoney, P. J., Levine, Mercure and Crew III, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
#### Patricia H. Mangone, Respondent, v Ronald S. Mangone, Appellant.

(Appeal No. 2.)

— Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs, in accordance with same Memorandum as in *Mangone v Man-gone*([appeal No. 1] 175 AD2d 655 [decided herewith]). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Patlow, J.— Equitable Distribution and Support.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Green, Pine and Lowery, JJ.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 119 (Tuesday, August 7, 2012)]
[Daily Digest]
[Page D827]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                     COMMITTEE MEETINGS FOR MONDAY,

                           SEPTEMBER 10, 2012

        (Committee meetings are open unless otherwise indicated)

                                 Senate

  No meetings/hearings scheduled.

                                 House

  No hearings are scheduled.
```