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

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 321 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 321

  To amend title X of the Public Health Service Act to permit family 
 planning projects to offer adoption services, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

             February 1 (legislative day, January 30), 1995

   Mr. Helms introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
         referred to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend title X of the Public Health Service Act to permit family 
 planning projects to offer adoption services, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Federal Adoption Services Act of 
1995''.

SEC. 2. ADOPTION SERVICES.

    Section 1001(a) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300(a)) 
is amended by inserting after the first sentence the following new 
sentences: ``Such projects may also offer adoption services. Any 
adoption services provided under such projects shall be 
nondiscriminatory as to race, color, religion, or national origin.''.
                                 <all>
```
Revised draft of Toxics Rule preamble Bill Maxwell to: Cortney_Higgins 03/16/2011 09:18 AM Bcc: Peter Tsirigotis, Kevin Culligan, RobertJ Wayland

Cortney --

Here is the latest version.

Thanks.

E.O.12866TheToxicsRule2060-AP-52Proposal031611. doc Redline 031611 vs. 031511.doc

Deliberative Document -- FOIA Exempt

Bill Maxwell Energy Strategies Group Sector Policies and Programs Division U.S. EPA Mail Code D243-01 109 T.W. Alexander Drive Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 Phone: 919-541-5430 FAX: 919-541-5450
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1921 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 1921

    To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to transfer certain 
 facilities at the Minidoka project to the Burley Irrigation District, 
                        and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 27, 1996

   Mr. Craig introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to transfer certain 
 facilities at the Minidoka project to the Burley Irrigation District, 
                        and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
    Section 1. (a) The Secretary of the Interior (hereinafter referred 
to as the ``Secretary'') is authorized to transfer all right, title, 
and interest of the United States in and to canals, drains, laterals, 
pumps, properties and withdrawn or acquired lands and roads, together 
with associated rights-of-way, of the Minidoka project to and within 
the service area of the Burley Irrigation District (hereinafter 
referred to as the ``District'') for which the allocable construction 
costs have been fully repaid, without compensation, to the District.
    (b) The Secretary shall also transfer to the District, in 
accordance with and subject to State law, any water rights held by the 
Secretary for the benefit of the District and shall provide the 
District with a permanent allocation of storage space at Minidoka Dam, 
American Falls, and Palisades in accordance with the terms of the 
existing contracts and subject to the requirement that the District 
continue to assume the allocable costs of operation and maintenance 
associated with such storage rights.
    (c) The Secretary shall also provide the District with a permanent 
right to project power from the Minidoka, Palisades, Black Canyon, and 
Anderson Ranch power plants at the cost of production in accordance 
with the understandings and commitments made by the Secretary in 
acquiring such plants and the existing contracts for such power. At the 
request of the District, the Secretary is further authorized to 
transfer such plants to the District at such reasonable cost and 
subject to such terms and conditions as may be mutually agreed between 
the District and the Secretary.
                                 <all>
```
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996             DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996             SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           5,003                   5,003
<SECURITIES>                                    21,243                  21,243
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,465                  10,465
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,130                   1,130
<INVENTORY>                                        743                     743
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                39,303                  39,303
<PP&E>                                               
<DEPRECIATION>                                       
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  52,986                  52,986
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,565                   8,565
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                           127                     127
<OTHER-SE>                                      43,447                  43,447
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    52,986                  52,986
<SALES>                                         13,913                  37,906
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                13,913                  37,906
<CGS>                                           10,839                  29,204
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   13,640                  36,556
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (341)                   (260)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    614                   1,610
<INCOME-TAX>                                       283                     706
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                331                     904
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                       331                     453
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.03                    0.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.03                    0.04
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

                           PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350

                 (SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)

            I, TOM LAM, President and Chief Executive Officer (principal
executive officer) of Auto--Q International, Inc. (the "Registrant"), certifies
that to the best of my knowledge, based upon a review of the Quarterly Report on
Form 10-QSB for the period ended December 30, 2002 of the Registrant (the
"Report"):

            (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and


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



     /s/ Tom Lam
--------------------------
Name:    Tom Lam
Date:    February 19, 2003


                                  Exhibit 99.1
Very truly yours,/s/ Clint B. DavisClint B. Davis
Senior Vice President, Legal Affairs,

General Counsel and Secretary
<PAGE>   1
          


                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.2

                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the use of our report
dated August 22, 1994, in this Registration Statement on Form S-1 of
Comprehensive Care Corporation and Subsidiaries and to all references to our
firm included in this Registration Statement. It should be noted that we have
not audited any financial statements of the Company subsequent to May 31, 1994,
or performed any audit procedures subsequent to the date of our report.

/s/ Arthur Andersen LLP

ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

St. Louis, Missouri
January 28, 1997
[Cite as State v. Bell , 2023

- Ohio

- 822.]

COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO

EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA

STATE OF OHIO

, :

Plaintiff

- Appell ee , :
No. 11 1 899

v. :

TIMOTHY A. BELL

, :

Defendant

- Appell ant

. :

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION

JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED

RELEASED AND JOURNALIZED: March 16, 2023

Criminal Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas

Case No. CR

- 2 1

- 665320

- A

Appearances:

Michael C. O’Malley, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Michael Timms , Assistant Prosecuting
Attorney, for appell ee

.

Cullen Sweeney, Chief Public Defender, and Rick L.

Ferrara , Assistant Public Defender

, for a ppell ant

.EILEEN A. GALLAGHER , J.:

Defendant

- appellant Timothy A. Bell (“Bell”) appeals the imposition

of an indefinite sentence pursuant to a conviction for r obbery in Cuyahoga C.P. No.

CR

- 2 2

- 667283

- A

. 1

Because this court in State v. Delvallie 2022

- Ohio

- 470, 185 N.E.3d

536 ( 8th Dist.) (en banc)

, has addressed and overruled Bell’s arguments that S.B.

201 violates the doctrine of separation of powers, we affirm Bell’s convictions.

Bell raised one assignment of error:

The trial court erred when it found S.B. 201 to be Constitutional and impos ed an indefinite sentence pursuant to S.B. 201.

In Delvallie, supra , this court sitting en banc overruled the argument s

Bell presents in this appeal. As such, the sole assignment of error is overruled.

Judgment affirmed.

It is ordered that appell ee recov er from appell ant costs herein taxed.

The court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal.

It is ordered that a special mand ate issue out of this court directing the

common pleas court to carry this judgment into execution

.

1 Appellant’s notice of appeal incorporates a second case in which he entered a plea of guilty to d rug p ossession in Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR

- 2 1

- 665320

- A

. In that case

, he was

sentenced to a term of one year which was ordered to be served concurrently to the

sentence for r obbery in Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR

- 22

- 667283

- A. The Reagan Tokes Act does not apply to that sentence.A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27

of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.

________________________ EILEEN A. GALLAGHER

, JUDGE

FRANK DANIEL CELEBREZZE, III , P. J.

, and

MICHAEL JOHN RYAN

, J., CONCUR
<PAGE>   1


                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1


              STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS


Net Income Per Share

     Net income per share is computed using the weighted average number of
common and dilutive shares outstanding during the period. A reconciliation of
the numerators and denominators of the basic and diluted per-share computations
follows:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                      YEAR ENDED MARCH 31,
                                           ---------------------------------------
                                               1998          1999          2000
                                           -----------   -----------   -----------
<S>                                        <C>           <C>           <C>
BASIC
Numerator:

Net income                                 $ 7,931,000   $12,694,000   $20,555,000
Preferred stock dividends                      200,000            --            --
                                           -----------   -----------   -----------
                                           $ 7,731,000   $12,694,000   $20,555,000
                                           ===========   ===========   ===========
Denominator:

Weighted average common
   stock outstanding                        17,511,508    20,504,290    21,260,163
                                           ===========   ===========   ===========

Net income per share                       $      0.44   $      0.62   $      0.97
                                           ===========   ===========   ===========


DILUTED
Numerator:

Net income                                 $ 7,931,000   $12,694,000   $20,555,000
                                           ===========   ===========   ===========

Denominator:

Weighted average common                     17,511,508    20,504,290    21,260,163
   stock outstanding

Other Dilutive Securities:
Series B preferred stock                     2,222,222        73,260            --
Options and warrants using the
  treasury stock method                      2,968,108     2,798,652     2,977,053
                                           -----------   -----------   -----------
Weighted average shares outstanding         22,701,838    23,376,202    24,237,216
                                           ===========   ===========   ===========

Net income per share                       $      0.35   $      0.54   $      0.85
                                           ===========   ===========   ===========
</TABLE>
II

Calendar No. 170

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 369

To designate the Federal Courthouse in Decatur, Alabama, as the ‘‘Seybourn

H. Lynne Federal Courthouse’’, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 8 (legislative day, JANUARY 30), 1995

Mr. HEFLIN (for himself and Mr. SHELBY) introduced the following bill;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and

Public Works

AUGUST 7 (legislative day, JULY 10), 1995

Reported by Mr. CHAFEE, without amendment

A BILL

To designate the Federal Courthouse in Decatur, Alabama,

as the ‘‘Seybourn H. Lynne Federal Courthouse’’, 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. DESIGNATION.

4 The Federal Courthouse in Decatur, Alabama, is des5 ignated as the ‘‘Seybourn H. Lynne Federal Courthouse’’.
2

S 369 RS

1 SEC. 2. LEGAL REFERENCES.

2 Any reference in any law, regulation, document,

3 record, map, or other paper of the United States to the

4 building referred to in section 1 is deemed to be a ref5 erence to the Seybourn H. Lynne Federal Courthouse.

Calendar No. 170

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 369

A BILL

To designate the Federal Courthouse in Decatur,

Courthouse’’, and for other purposes.Alabama, as the ‘‘Seybourn H. Lynne Federal

AUGUST 7 (legislative day, JULY 10), 1995

Reported without amendment
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
KARRINGTON HEALTH, INC. ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS FOR THE YEAR ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                      12,283,185
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  784,208
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            13,237,647
<PP&E>                                      54,180,700
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,168,952
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              69,549,941
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,431,303
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    31,984,712
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,307,766)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                69,549,941
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,595,562
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                6,574,958
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             4,158,944
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             801,496
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,939,836)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   683,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,622,836)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,622,836)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.48)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.48)


</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 21-0587

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

JOSE MARTINEZ JR.,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and 

good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including July 29, 2022, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 22 2022

06/22/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0587
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





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of iCurie, Inc. (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2006 as filed with the
      Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Hakan Wretsell, Chief
      Executive 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 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 result of operations of the
                Company.







/s/
      Hakan
      Wretsell





Hakan
      Wretsell


Chief
      Executive Officer


August
      2,
      2006
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-17-00575- CR

Jam ie F letc her, Jr., A ppellan t

v. The State of Texas, App ellee

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F TRAVIS CO UNTY, 299 TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. D-1 -DC- 85- 0791 42, H ONO RAB LE KAREN SAGE, JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
A revie w of the rec ord s h o ws that on November 2, 2016, the trial court denied appellant’ s pro se motion for DNA testing filed in J une 2016, see Tex. Code Crim. Proc. arts. 64.01- .05, and that appellant filed another motion for DNA testing and appointment of counsel in Dec ember 2016. The State filed a response to the motion for appointment of counsel, stating that 1 it did not oppose the reque st, an d o n Au gu s t 10, 2017, the trial court appointed an attorney to repr esent a

ppellant under

chapte r 64. See id

. Appellant’s pro se notice of app ea l was filed in the trial court cler k’s office on August 15, 2017. In that document, appellant stated that he wished “to prosec ute this appea l f rom the judgme nt e ntere d in this action on the 9[t h] day of April, 1986,” r efe rringto his c onviction f or

Appellant has also filed sever al other filings, but it does not a ppear any order s have been 1 enter ed as to those documents, nor has counsel indicated that the appea l conce rns those documents.attempted ag g rava ted sexual a ssault. Following an inquiry by this Court into what was the subject matter o f t h e appea l and whether we could exercise jurisdiction over this matter, appellant’ s appointed attorney has explained that this is an appea l from the ref usal of DNA testing but that the trial court ha s not signed a ny order s as to the subsequent motion for DN A testing

. Be cause the t rial court has not signe d any appea lable order s as to the most rec ent motion for DNA testing and the time for appea ling from the November 2016 order ran well befor e appellant filed his notice of appe al , s ee Tex. R. App. P. 26.2, we dismiss the appea l for want of jurisdiction, see Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 64.05 (appe als under chapte r 64 are “in the same manner
as an appea l of any other criminal matter” ); Apolinar v. State , 820 S.W .2d 792, 794 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (cour

t of appea ls lacks jurisdiction to revie w interlocutory order s unless expressly g rante d by law); Taylor v

. State , 268 S.W .3d 752, 755 (Tex. App.—Waco 2008, pet. re f’d) (same)

. We de ny appellant’ s motion t o abate the appe al.

__________________________________________ David Pury ear , J ustice Be fore J ustices Pury ear , Field, a nd Bour land Dismissed for Want of J urisdiction Filed: Oc tober 26, 2017 Do Not Publish

2