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

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1465 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.1465

                       One Hundred Fourth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
  the fourth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-five

                                 An Act

 
                       To extend au pair programs.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF AU PAIR PROGRAMS.

    (a) Repeal.--Section 8 of the Eisenhower Exchange Fellowship Act of 
1990 (Public Law 101-454) is repealed.
    (b) Authority for Au Pair Programs.--The Director of the United 
States Information Agency is authorized to continue to administer an au 
pair program, operating on a world-wide basis, through fiscal year 
1997.
    (c) Report.--Not later than October 1, 1996, the Director of the 
United States Information Agency shall submit a report regarding the 
continued extension of au pair programs to the Committee on Foreign 
Relations of the Senate and the Committee on International Relations of 
the House of Representatives. This report shall specifically detail the 
compliance of all au pair organizations with regulations governing au 
pair programs as published on February 15, 1995.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
SIXTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

Case No. 6D23-710

Lower Tribunal No. CF21-003904-XX

_____________________________

JAMES ARGO,JR.,

Appellant, 

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk County.

Ronald A. Herring, Judge.

January 9, 2024 

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

MIZE, BROWNLEE and GANNAM, JJ., concur.

Howard L. “Rex” Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Christopher Desrochers, Special 

Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Jonathan P. Hurley, Assistant 

Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING 

AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF TIMELY FILED
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








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 period ended September 30, 2009 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 17th day of  May, 2010.











/s/ Stephen D. BarnhillStephen D. Barnhill, M.D.Chief Executive Officer/s/ R. Scott TobinR. Scott TobinPrincipal Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 127 (Wednesday, September 19, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6445-S6446]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                      MESSAGES FROM THE PRESIDENT

  Messages from the President of the United States were communicated to 
the Senate by Mr. Pate, one of his secretaries.

[[Page S6446]]

                          ____________________
```
Exhibit 99.2

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 Annual Report of Lawson Software, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended August 31, 2002
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert G. Barbieri, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial 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:



| |  | /s/ROBERT G. BARBIERIRobert G. Barbieri Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
| |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |  | October 10, 2002                                                                            

---

QuickLinks
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      Exhibit 13

                  SHEFFIELD STEEL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

          Computation of Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation,
       Amortization, and Non-cash Post-retirement Benefit Expense (EBITDA)
                                 (In thousands)

<TABLE> 
<CAPTION> 

                                                                                Years Ended April 30,
                                                                        ------------------------------------
                                                                        1995           1996          1997
                                                                        ----           ----          ----
         <S>                                                       <C>               <C>            <C> 
         Net income (loss)                                         $   1,825          (3,091)       (3,509)
         Interest expense                                              8,049          11,733        11,769
         Income tax expense                                              197             -             -
         Depreciation and amortization                                 5,930           6,567         6,775
         Accrual of post-retirement benefit
           expense, net of cash paid                                   2,523           1,747         1,272
                                                                     -------         -------        ------

              EBITDA                                               $  18,524        $ 16,956      $ 16,307
                                                                     =======         =======        ======

         Restructuring expense                                           -               -           1,320
                                                                     -------         -------        ------     

              EBITDA, excluding restructuring expense              $  18,524        $ 16,956      $ 17,627
                                                                     =======         =======        ======

</TABLE>
Exhibit 31.3
**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER**
I, Jeffrey H. Smulyan, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A for the periodended May 31, 2003 of Emmis Operating Company; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect tothe period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have
 (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known tous by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, asof the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter inthe case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
 (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the designor operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.
Date: May 14, 2004   /s/ JEFFREY H. SMULYAN Jeffrey H. Smulyan Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer
-6-
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. AP-76,875

IN RE STATE OF TEXAS EX REL. MARK SKURKA, Relator

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS

CAUSE NO. 02-CR-1289-D

IN THE 105 DISTRICT COURT OF NUECES COUNTY

TH

Per curiam.

OPINION

Relator has filed a motion for leave to file a writ of mandamus pursuant to the original

jurisdiction of this Court. He requests that this Court order the district court to vacate its order which

directed Relator to prepare a judgment stating that real party in interest, Brandon Coronado, be not

convicted of the underlying offense and that the district court hold a new sentencing hearing pursuant

to this Court’s opinion in AP-76,787 delivered May 2, 2012. 

On July 26, 2012, this Court held this application in abeyance and ordered the Honorable

Angelica E. Hernandez to respond. Judge Hernandez stated that she believed this Court’s opinion
took Coronado back to the time of the motion to adjudicate guilt and that she was acting in

compliance with this Court’s opinion. The opinion of May 2, 2012 vacated only Coronado’s

sentence, not the adjudication of guilt, therefore Judge Hernandez’s order to dismiss the charges

against Coronado is contrary to the previous opinion issued by this Court. 

We conditionally grant mandamus relief and direct the Respondent to: (1) vacate her order

to dismiss charges against Coronado, and; (2) hold a sentencing hearing to sentence Coronado to a

term of years within the applicable punishment range of the offense in compliance with this Court’s 

May 2 opinion in the underlying case. The writ of mandamus will issue only in the event the nd

Respondent fails to comply within thirty days of the date of this opinion. 

Filed: September 12, 2012

Do not publish
BILL OF COSTS

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, SIXTH DISTRICT, AT TEXARKANA

No. 06-14-00102-CV

Johnny E. Webb, III

v.

Alex Rodriguez, et al.

(No. DC-14-09393 IN 95TH DISTRICT COURT OF DALLAS COUNTY)

TYPE OF FEE CHARGES PAID BY

MOTION FEE

MOTION FEE

MOTION FEE

CLERK'S RECORD

REPORTER'S RECORD

FILING FEE PAID TO COURT THAT 

TRANSFERRED CASE

$10.00

$10.00

$10.00

$527.00

$348.00

$195.00

E-PAID

E-PAID

E-PAID

PAID

PAID

E-PAID

LASHAWN A WILLIAMS

SUZY LANGLEY

SUZY LANGLEY

MELVIN HOUSTON

JOHNNY WEBB

LASHAWN A WILLIAMS

Balance of costs owing to the Sixth Court of Appeals, Texarkana, Texas: 0.00

Court costs in this cause shall be paid as per the Judgment issued by this Court.

I, DEBRA AUTREY, CLERK OF THE SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS OF THE 

STATE OF TEXAS, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct 

copy of the cost bill of THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH DISTRICT OF 

TEXAS, showing the charges and payments, in the above numbered and styled cause, 

as the same appears of record in this office.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, 

witness my hand and the Seal of 

the COURT OF APPEALS for 

the Sixth District of Texas, this 

August 20, 2015.

DEBRA AUTREY, CLERK

By ___________________________

Deputy
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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Trimeris, Inc. (the Company) for
the period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Andrew L. Graham, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as
adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 results of operations of the Company.



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ ANDREW L. GRAHAM   
|Andrew L. Graham       
|Chief Financial Officer
|                       
|March 17, 2008         

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. 1350 and is not
being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
#### STATE of Oklahoma, ex rel. jointly and severally, The BOARD OF EDUCATION OF INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 16 (LE FLORE) OF LE FLORE COUNTY et al., Plaintiffs in Error, v. The STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION of the State of Oklahoma et al., Defendants in Error.

No. 36620.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma.

Feb. 14, 1956.

*584Mastin Geschwind, Oklahoma City, for plaintiffs in error.

Mac Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., J. H. Johnson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendants in error.

JACKSON, Justice.

From an adverse judgment wherein plaintiffs sought a peremptory writ of man-'damu's against the State Board of Education et al., plaintiffs appeal. The parties will be referred to as they appeared in the trial court.

This case arises out of the administration of the minimum school program as set forth in 70 O.S.1951 § 18-4 et seq.

Plaintiffs are school districts in-the county of Le Flore where is located a Federal forest reserve which is • contiguous to said districts. In years past these districts have shared in funds returned by the Federal Government to this state under the provisions of an Act of Congress and set forth in 16 U.S.C.A.- § 500, and as provided by 62 O.S.1951 § 326.

For each, of the fiscal years involved, ending June 30, 1952 and June 30, 1953, the defendants included as income an estimate of the amount of these Federal reserve rentals in computing “Minimum Program Income” of the various plaintiff school districts under the terms of 70 O.S.1951 § 18-4, subd. 2, par. i, thus reducing, by the amount of such income, the apportionment of State Aid to the respective districts under the “minimum school program.”

 The sole issue raised on this appeal is whether such revenue, or an estimate thereof, 'is to be included and charged against the school districts as part of their minimum program income.

This Court has heretofore considered this question as applied to Federal “ ‘Flood Control Rentals’ ” in State ex rel. Boards of Education of Independent School Districts No. 1-2 and No. 1-3 of Marshall County v. State Board of Education, Okl., 289 P.2d 653, 655, wherein it was held that, under the provisions of 70 O.S.1951 § 184-, subd.' 2, par. i, as enacted and in force applicable to the years involved here, it was proper tó include “ ‘Flood Control Rentals’ ” in “Minimum Program Income.” It was therein observed that the statute provided for inclusion in “Minimum Program Income” all other revenue of the school districts which can be legally estimated, except “ ‘surplus cash and taxes in the process of collection, State Aid for Special Educational Program and Federal reimbursements for approved vocational programs.’ ”

It is our opinion that for the same reasons as set forth in said case, it is proper to include in “Minimum Program Income” that revenue which is received from Forest reserve rentals, there being nothing in the applicable statutes to justify a different rule as between the two sources of income.

Finding no error, the judgment of the lower court is affirmed.

JOHNSON, C. J., WILLIAMS, V. C. J., and WELCH, CORN, DAVISON, HALLEY and HUNT, JJ., concur.
Form 8-K - 01/09/12 Executive Compensation (Ex. 10.2) (W0388119).DOC








Exhibit 10.2




Wausau Paper Corp.

2014 Equity Incentive Compensation Plan




Grants of performance units under the 2014 Equity Incentive Compensation Plan will vest upon the Company’s attainment of certain targeted levels of “total shareholder return.”  The calculation of total shareholder return is measured over a three year period (ending December 31, 2014), and is calculated by reference to a “target” and a “maximum” total shareholder return.  If total shareholder return is at the target (7% per year return, or 22.5% over the three-year performance period), grant recipients will receive 50% of the total potential award.  If total shareholder return is at or above the maximum (14% per year, or 45.0% over the three-year performance period), grant recipients will receive 100% of the total potential award.  At total shareholder return levels that are less than the maximum, the award is prorated based on the actual level of total shareholder return that is achieved.  The maximum potential award for the CEO, chief financial officer, and each of the other executive officers with segment operating responsibility, as well as the levels that would be achieved at the target for total shareholder return, is described in the table below.




					
	 
	Performance Units Granted


	 
	Total Opportunity

	 

	 
	(Award at Max. TSR)

	Award at Target TSR


	 
	 
	 

	CEO

	114,572

	 
	57,286

	 

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	Executive Vice President, Finance*

	0

	 
	0

	 

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	Senior Vice President, Tissue

	28,567

	 
	14,284

	 

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	Senior Vice President, Paper

	25,359

	 
	12,680

	 






*On December 19, 2011, Scott P. Doescher, Executive Vice President, Finance, notified the Company that he intended to resign effective February 28, 2012.  As a result, equity incentive awards under the 2014 Equity Incentive Compensation Plan were not issued to Mr. Doescher.




Under the 2014 Equity Incentive Compensation Plan, “total shareholder return” is determined by dividing (1) the sum of (a) the average closing share price for the Company’s common stock over the last 60 trading days of the period immediately prior to the end of the three-year performance period (the “Maturity Date FMV”); and (b) cash dividends paid during the three-year performance period; by (2) the average closing share price for the Company’s common stock over the last 60 trading days preceding the date of grant (the “Grant Date FMV”).  The formula for calculating TSR is as follows:




			
	(Maturity Date FMV + Cash Dividends Paid)

	– 1

	=  Total Shareholder Return


	Grant Date FMV







Total shareholder return is calculated to the closest tenth of a percent, and vested performance units are rounded to the next highest whole unit.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF**

**CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**OF MAX RE CAPITAL LTD.**

 

This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. § 1350, and accompanies thequarterly report on Form 10-Q (the “Form 10-Q”) for the quarter ended June 30, 2004 of Max Re Capital Ltd. (the “Issuer”). 

 

I, Keith S. Hynes, the Chief Financial Officer of Issuer certify that: 

 

(i) the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or78o(d)); and 

 

(ii) the information contained in the Form 10-Qfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer. 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version ofthis written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Issuer and will be retained by the Issuer and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. 

 

Dated: August 3, 2004
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 OF

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

OF MAX CAPITAL GROUP LTD.

This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. § 1350, and accompanies the quarterly report
on Form 10-Q (the Form 10-Q) for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 of Max Capital Group Ltd. (the Issuer).

I,
W. Marston Becker, the Chief Executive Officer of Issuer, certify that:

(i) the Form 10-Q fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

(ii) the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the
electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Issuer and will be retained by the Issuer and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

Dated: November 6, 2009



|       |  |                        
|------ |  | -----------------------
|       | 
|       |  | /s/ W. Marston Becker  
|Name:  |  | W. Marston Becker      
|Title: |  | Chief Executive Officer
II

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1455

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the coastwise

trade for the vessel MOVIN ON, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

DECEMBER 7, 1995

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

to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a

certificate of documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the coastwise trade for the vessel

MOVIN ON, 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. VESSEL DOCUMENTATION.

4 Notwithstanding section 27 of the Merchant Marine

5 Act, 1920 (46 U.S.C. App. 883), section 8 of the Act of

6 June 19, 1886 (24 Stat. 81, chapter 421; 46 U.S.C. App.

7 289), and sections 12106 through 12108 of title 46,

8 United States Code, the Secretary of Transportation may
2

•S 1455 IS

1 issue a certificate of documentation with appropriate en2 dorsement for employment in the coastwise trade for the

3 vessel MOVIN ON, United States official number 585100.

Æ