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

Calendar No. 88

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 528

[Report No. 104–66]

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of

documentation and coastwise trade endorsement for three vessels.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 9 (legislative day, MARCH 6), 1995

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

the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

APRIL 18, 1995

Reported, under authority of the order of the Senate of April 6 (legislative

day, April 5), 1995, by Mr. PRESSLER, without amendment

A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a

certificate of documentation and coastwise trade endorsement for three vessels.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

S 528 RS

1 SECTION 1. COASTWISE TRADE AUTHORIZATION FOR

2 HOVERCRAFT.

3 Notwithstanding section 27 of the Merchant Marine

4 Act, 1920 (46 U.S.C. App. 883), the Act of June 19, 1886

5 (46 U.S.C. App. 289), and sections 12106 and 12107 of

6 title 46, United States Code, the Secretary of Transpor7 tation may issue a certificate of documentation with a

8 coastwise endorsement for each of the vessels IDUN VI9 KING (Danish Registration number A433), LIV VIKING

10 (Danish Registration number A394), and FREJA VI11 KING (Danish Registration number A395) if—

12 (1) all repair and alteration work on the vessels

13 necessary to their operation under this section is

14 performed in the United States;

15 (2) a binding contract for the construction in

16 the United States of at least 3 similar vessels for the

17 coastwise trade is executed by the owner of the ves18 sels within 6 months after the date of enactment of

19 this Act; and

20 (3) the vessels constructed under the contract

21 entered into under paragraph (1) are to be delivered

22 within 3 years after the date of entering into that

23 contract.

Calendar No. 88

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 528

[Report No. 104–66]

A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to

wise trade endorsement for three vessels.issue a certificate of documentation and coastAPRIL 18, 1995

Reported without amendment
#### Ai Yu YEA, aka, Ai Yu Ea, Ai Yu Ye, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 01-71868.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted July 22, 2002.*

Decided July 31, 2002.

Before: BROWNING, KOZINSKI, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Ai Yu Yea, native and citizen of the People’s Republic of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) denial of her motion to reopen proceedings in order to reassert a claim under the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (“Convention Against Torture”).

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b). We review the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of discretion, and the BIA’s factual findings under the substantial evidence standard. *Kamalthas v. INS,*251 F.3d 1279, 1281 (9th Cir.2001). We deny the petition.

The BIA dismissed Yea’s appeal because she failed to provide any new evidence that could not have been presented at the prior hearing, as mandated by 8 C.F.R. § 3.2(c)(1) (“A motion to reopen proceedings shall not be granted unless it appears to the Board that evidence sought to be offered is material and was not available and could not have been discovered or presented at the former hearing”).

Yea could have obtained and presented her evidence at the time of her original hearing; therefore, the BIA did not err by denying her motion to reopen. *See Ramortr-Sepulveda v. INS,*743 F.2d 1307, 1310 (9th Cir.1984).

Yea’s remaining contentions lack merit.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
II

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 312

To provide for an Assistant Administrator for Indian Lands in the

Environmental Protection Agency, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 1 (legislative day, JANUARY 30), 1995

Mr. MCCAIN (for himself and Mr. INOUYE) introduced the following bill; which

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs

A BILL

To provide for an Assistant Administrator for Indian Lands

in the Environmental Protection Agency, 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. ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR FOR INDIAN

4 LANDS.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—

6 (1) APPOINTMENT.—The President, by and

7 with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall ap8 point within the Environmental Protection Agency

9 an Assistant Administrator for Indian Lands.
2

•S 312 IS

1 (2) COMPENSATION.—The Assistant Adminis2 trator for Indian Lands appointed under this sub3 section shall be compensated at a rate provided for

4 in level V of the Executive Schedule under section

5 5316 of title 5, United States Code.

6 (b) DUTIES.—The Assistant Administrator for In7 dian Lands appointed under this section shall—

8 (1) coordinate the activities of the Environ9 mental Protection Agency with respect to Indian

10 lands and federally recognized Indian tribes; and

11 (2) implement the stated policy of the Environ12 mental Protection Agency commonly referred to as

13 the ‘‘1984 Indian Policy’’.

14 (c) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 5316 of

15 title 5, United States Code, is amended by adding at the

16 end the following:

17 ‘‘Assistant Administrator for Indian Lands, En18 vironmental Protection Agency.’’.

Æ
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-90,410-01

EX PARTE ADRIK HOUSTON, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. C-297-W011490-1429561-A IN THE 297 DISTRICT COURT TH

FROM TARRANT COUNTY 

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of the offense of

aggravated assault against a family member with a deadly weapon and sentenced to imprisonment

for seventy years. The Second District Court of Appeals in Fort Worth affirmed the trial court’s

judgment. See Houston v. State, No. 02-17-00025-CR (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Mar. 1, 2018, no

pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication).

The trial court signed an order designating issues on April 24, 2019. The habeas record has

been properly forwarded to this Court by the district clerk pursuant to TEX. R. APP. P. 73.4(b)(5). 
However, the record has been forwarded without the trial court having resolved the designated

issue(s) in this case. We remand this application to the 297 District Court of Tarrant County to th

allow the trial judge to complete an evidentiary investigation and enter findings of fact and

conclusions of law.

This application will be held in abeyance until the trial court has resolved the fact issues. The

issues shall be resolved within 90 days of this order. A supplemental transcript containing all

affidavits and interrogatories or the transcription of the court reporter’s notes from any hearing or

deposition, along with the trial court’s supplemental findings of fact and conclusions of law, shall

be forwarded to this Court within 120 days of the date of this order. Any extensions of time shall be

obtained from this Court. 

Filed: October 23, 2019

Do not publish
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 16

- 00117

- CR

Bradley Gregg

v.

The State of Texas §

§

§

§

§ From the 16th District Court

o f Denton County (F

- 2014

- 0360

- A )

December 1, 2016

Opinion by Justice Sudderth

(nfp)



### JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of

the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPE ALS

By

_ _ /s/ Bonnie Sudderth

_______________ Justice Bonnie Sudderth
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 25 (Tuesday, February 6, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 8246]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-02251]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Cooperative Research Group H2ICE Demonstration 
Vehicle (``H2ICE'')

    Notice is hereby given that, on December 5, 2023, pursuant to 
section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Cooperative Research Group 
H<INF>2</INF>ICE Demonstration Vehicle (``H<INF>2</INF>ICE'') has filed 
written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the 
Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The 
notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's 
provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual 
damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Daimler Truck 
North America LLC, Portland, OR, has been added as a party to this 
venture.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and H<INF>2</INF>ICE intends to file 
additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.
    On August 14, 2023, H<INF>2</INF>ICE filed its original 
notification pursuant to section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of 
Justice published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to section 
6(b) of the Act on November 20, 2023 (88 FR 80763).

Suzanne Morris,
Deputy Director Civil Enforcement Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 2024-02251 Filed 2-5-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
EXHIBIT 99.1

          CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       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 of Imaging Technologies Corporation
(the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities  and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), we, Brian
Bonar,  Chief  Executive  Officer  and  James  R.  Downey, Jr., Chief Accounting
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:

(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/  Brian  Bonar.
------------------

Brian  Bonar
Chief  Executive  Officer

/s/  James  R.  Downey
----------------------

James  R.  Downey
Chief  Accounting  Officer


Date:  November  12,  2002
Blues

357.05258
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

    CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002,
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Greenfield Online, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2005 to be filed with
Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Robert E. Bies, Executive Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, 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 as of the dates and for the periods covered by the
            Report.

Date: August 15, 2005                               By: /s/ Robert E. Bies
                                                    ----------------------------
                                                    Robert E. Bies
                                                    Executive Vice-President and
                                                    Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Greenfield Online, Inc. and will be retained by Greenfield Online,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen

Kurtis T. Wilder,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

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

 September 15, 2017

t0912

Order 

Clerk

September 15, 2017

155034-5

MICHAEL J. BEDFORD,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 155034

COA: 327372 

Kent CC: 14-011752-CZ

DEREK S. WITTE, JORDAN C. HOYER, and

LAW OFFICES OF JORDAN C. HOYER, PLLC,

Defendants-Appellants. 

_________________________________________/

GARY STEWART, JR.,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 155035

COA: 327373 

Kent CC: 14-011813-CZ

DEREK S. WITTE, JORDAN C. HOYER, and

LAW OFFICES OF JORDAN C. HOYER, PLLC,

Defendants-Appellants. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the stipulation signed by counsel for the parties agreeing to 

the dismissal of this application for leave to appeal is considered, and the application for 

leave to appeal is DISMISSED with prejudice and without costs.
## NO. 12

- 09

- 003 8 4

- CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

GUILLERMO GALINDEZ

, ' APPEAL FROM THE

APPELLANT

V. ' COUNTY COURT AT LAW OF

JERALD HAIRFORD AND RICHARD

FOSTER, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS

PARTNERS OF ISIS ' SMIT H COUNTY, TEXAS

REAL ESTATE SERVICES; ISIS

INVESTIGATIONS, INC., AND

TIM LEE, APPELLEES

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

This appeal is being dismissed for failure to comply with the Texas Rules of

Appellate Procedure. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3. Purs uant to rule 32.1, the docketing

statement was due to have been filed at the time the appeal was perfected, i.e.,

October 14, 2009. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 32.1. On November 13, 2009, this court

notified Appellant, Guillermo Galindez, that he should file a d ocketing statement

immediately if he had not already done so. On the same date, by separate letter, this

court notified Galindez that the filing fee was due on or before November 23, 2009.

Because Galindez did not file the docketing statement as requeste d in our

November 13, 2009 letter, this court issued a second notice on December 4, 2009

advising Galindez that the docketing statement was past due. The notice also advised

Galindez that the filing fee in the appeal was due to have been paid on or before

November 23, 2009, but had not been received. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 5. The notice

further provided that unless the docketing statement and filing fee were filed on or

before December 14, 2009, the appeal would be presented for dismissal in accordance

with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3. The date for filing the docketingstatement and the filing fee have passed, and Galindez has not complied with the

court’s request or otherwise responded to the court’s notices. Because Galindez has

failed, after notice, to comply with rules 5 and 32.1, the appeal is dismissed

. See T EX

.

R. A PP

. P. 42.3(c).

Opinion delivered December 16 , 2009.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.

(PUBLISH)
**EXHIBIT      32**

**SECTION      1350 CERTIFICATIONS**

|   | 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. |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 3) | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                and |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 4) | The                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Company. |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
OFFICIAL NOTICE FROM COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXA

P.O. BOX 12308, CAPITOL STATION, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711

6/2/2015 g: XA7v<£ !l COACaseNo. 1

Blaylock, Cody Lamont Tr. Ct. No. 114-1070-10 

On this day, this Court has granted the Appellant's Pro Se motion 

of time in which to file the Petition for Discretionary Review. Th

petition has been extended to Wednesday, June 17, 2015. 

EXTENSIONS WILL BE ENTERTAINED. NOTE: Petition F

Review must be filed with The Court of Criminal Appeals.

A

12TH COURT OF APPEALS CLERK

CATHY LUSK

1517 W. FRONT, ROOM 354

TYLER, TX 75701

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *
EXHIBIT 31.2 

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE**

**SARBANES OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, David A.Yost, Chief Financial Officer, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterlyreport on Form 10-QSB of Raybor Management Inc.; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge,this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respectthe period covered by this quarterly report; 

 

3. Based on my knowledge, thefinancial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly 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 inthis quarterly report; 

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and Iare 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 we have: 

 

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed underour 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 quarterly report is beingprepared; 

 

(b) evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’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 theregistrant’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 isreasonably likely to 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 ofregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): 

 

(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 controls over financial reporting. 

 

Date: May 10, 2004