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

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1843 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1843

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 30, 2011

Received; read twice and referred to Committee on Homeland Security and 
                          Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 489 Army Drive in Barrigada, Guam, as the ``John Pangelinan Gerber 
                        Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. JOHN PANGELINAN GERBER POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 489 Army Drive in Barrigada, Guam, shall be known and 
designated as the ``John Pangelinan Gerber Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``John 
Pangelinan Gerber Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 30, 2011.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Balance Sheet, Statement of operations, Statement of Cash Flows
and Notes thereto incorporated in Part  I, Item 1, of this
Form 10-QSB/A and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>  0001110189
<NAME> I-Trax.com., Inc

<S>                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                       9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                  SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                            311,181
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     339,094
<ALLOWANCES>                                            0
<INVENTORY>                                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  847,295
<PP&E>                                            327,152
<DEPRECIATION>                                          0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  1,513,360
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             771,217
<BONDS>                                                 0
<COMMON>                                           18,711
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                        696,166
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    1,513,360
<SALES>                                           212,936
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                        0
<CGS>                                             117,610
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                           0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                1,616,695
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    944
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,522,313)
<INCOME-TAX>                                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                     0
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,522,313)
<EPS-BASIC>                                         (0.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       (0.08)


</TABLE>
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

_____________

No. 12-14984

Non-Argument Calendar

_____________

D.C. Docket Nos. 1:11-cv-04595-RLV; 11-bkc-81588-MHM

In Re: Mary Kay Pullen,

Debtor.

_____________________________________________________________

ATTORNEY GARY C. HARRIS,

Plaintiff,

CAIN V. HARRIS,

Plaintiff- Appellant,

versus

MARY KAY PULLEN,

Defendant -Appellee.

____________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Georgia

____________

(July 29, 2013)

Before HULL, JORDAN, and HILL, Circuit Judges.

Case: 12-14984 Date Filed: 07/29/2013 Page: 1 of 3 
2

PER CURIAM:

Cain Harris appealed the bankruptcy court’s vacation of its order lifting the 

automatic stay entered on behalf of Mary Kay Pullen. The district court held that 

the bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in vacating its prior order. We 

agree.

The relevant facts are that Pullen filed for bankruptcy the day prior to the 

scheduled foreclosure sale of her property. Harris, her creditor, filed his 

emergency motion to modify the automatic stay, certifying that he had served 

Pullen by email notifying her of his emergency motion. Based in part upon this 

representation, the bankruptcy court lifted its stay and the foreclosure sale took 

place. In its order, the bankruptcy court also directed Harris to file a motion within 

48 hours to annul the automatic stay, stating that the limited relief granted by the 

modification would be vacated unless Harris timely filed such motion. Harris did 

not do so (he filed an untimely motion) and the bankruptcy court’s modification of 

the stay expired by its own terms.

Subsequently, the bankruptcy court held a hearing on these proceedings and 

found as a matter of fact, conceded by Harris, that, contrary to his certification, he 

did not email notice of his emergency motion to Pullen. The court stated that it 

relied upon Harris’ representations to the contrary in granting ex parte the 

Case: 12-14984 Date Filed: 07/29/2013 Page: 2 of 3 
3

emergency motion. The court vacated its prior modification of the automatic stay 

and denied Harris’ motion for emergency relief. It is this order that Harris 

appealed to the district court.

The district court denied Harris’ appeal, affirming the bankruptcy court’s 

vacation of its order modifying the stay. The district court held that the bankruptcy 

court did not abuse its discretion when it vacated its prior modification of the stay 

that was granted upon a false or mistaken representation that Pullen had been 

notified of the motion.

We agree. Under these circumstances, the bankruptcy court was entitled to 

vacate its prior modification of the stay. The bankruptcy court found as a matter of 

fact that Pullen did not have adequate notice of the motion. The district court held 

that this finding of fact is not clearly erroneous and we agree. Therefore, we shall 

affirm the district court’s judgment affirming the vacation of the modification of 

the stay.

AFFIRMED.

 

Case: 12-14984 Date Filed: 07/29/2013 Page: 3 of 3
Bureau of Labor Statistics

**Series Id: Series title:**  **Labor force status: Type of data:**  **Age: Years:**  **Year Qtr1**  **Qtr2 Qtr3**  **Qtr4 Annual**  **2011** 16845 Civilian noninstitutional population Number in thousands 16 to 19 years 2011 to 2011 

### Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey **Original Data Value** LNU00000012Q **Not Seasonally Adjusted** (Unadj) Population Level - 16-19 yrs.

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics Generated on: May 16, 2011 (02:07:10 PM)
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 Quarterly Report of Deep Down, Inc. (“Deep Down”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (“the Report”), the undersigned, Eugene L. Butler, Chief Financial Officer of Deep Down, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 results of operations of Deep Down.





This written statement is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Report. A signed original of this statement has been provided to Deep Down and will be retained by Deep Down and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





Date:           August 21, 2009





/s/EUGENE L. BUTLER


Eugene L. Butler


Chief Financial Officer


(Principal Financial Officer)
**Exhibit 32.1**

** **

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED BY**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Inconnection with the Annual Report of Rockwood Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”)on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, SeifiGhasemi, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.   TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.   Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| Date:  February 29, 2008         |   |
|---------------------------------------|--------|
|                                  |
| /s/ SEIFI  GHASEMI               |   |
| Seifi  Ghasemi                        |
| Chairman  and Chief Executive Officer |

 

 

Thiscertification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company forpurposes of Section 18 or any other provision of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934, as amended.

 

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 or otherdocument authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature thatappears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statementrequired by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will beretained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commissionor its staff upon request.

 

----
EXHIBIT 31.1 - CERTIFICATION

I, Lewis M. Edwards, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Image Technology
Laboratories, 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 respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report.

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial 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 period presented in this quarterly report.

4. I am 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 I 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 me by others within those entities,
      particularly during the period in which this quarterly 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;

5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent function):

(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.


/S/ LEWIS M. EDWARDS
--------------------
LEWIS M. EDWARDS,
CHAIRMAN, EXECUTIVE VICE-PRESIDENT,
CHIEF TECHNOLOGY OFFICER, AND PRINCIPAL
ACCOUNTING OFFICER
MAY 15, 2007
Final Notes July 9, 2010 

### Steam Study Data Review Notes Total Suspended Solids Standa rd Method 2540D (1991) (Dried at 103-105°C)

1. The samples should be brought to ro om temperature before analysis.
2. The filter should be dried in an oven at 103- 105°C for 1 hour, cooled in a desiccator, and weighed. The above process should be repeat ed until the weight change was less than 4% of the previous weight or 0.5 mg (whichever is less) (2540D/3a).
3. Sample volumes should be selected so that 10-200 mg of dry resi due would be acquired. If filtration took longer than 10 minutes, the filter size should be increased or the sample volume decreased (2540C/3c).
4. After filtration, at least three aliquots of 10 ml of reagent-gr ade water should be added to the sample/filter and suc tion should be continued for 3 minutes after washing.
5. The sample should be dried in an oven for a minimum of 1 hour at 103-105°C, cooled in a desiccator, and weighed. The above process should be repeated unt il the weight change was less than 4% of the previous weight or less than 0.5 mg (whichever is less).
6. If laboratory duplicates were run, duplicate weights shoul d be within 5% of their average? (2540D/3c). If applicab le, indicate whether this cr iteria was met and specify the average and percent recovery from th e average for each of the samples.
7. Samples may contain calcium, magnesium, chlo ride and/or sulfate. Such species may make the sample hygroscopic. The following procedures should be done in order to prevent errors: drying time increased, proper dessication procedures used, and samples weighed rapidly (2540C/1b).
8. Care should be taken to excl ude large floating particles or submerged agglomerates (2540D/1b).
9. Desiccant should be kept inside the balance to maintain humidity control in the balance.
10. The oven temperature should be checked fo r proper setting and stability and the temperature recorded. If reporte d, indicate the oven temperature.
11. The oven thermometer should be immersed in a sand bath or other suitable thermal mass.
12. The desiccator should have a good seal (vacuum or grease).
13. The balance should be checked with “S ” class weights (100 mg, 1 g, and 100 g).
14. The analytical balance should ha ve been serviced and calibrate d within the last year. If provided, indicate the la st date of service.
#### D. L. WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 28011.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 23, 1955.

No appearance for appellant.

Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant has filed his affidavit stating that he desires to have his appeal in this case dismissed.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
11 TH C OURT OF A PPEALS

E ASTLAND

, T EXAS

J UDGMENT

Marilyn Hanks

, * From the 29 th District Court

of Palo Pinto County,

Trial Court No. C48039

.

Vs. No. 11

- 1 8

- 00 112

- CV * September 27

, 2018

City of Mineral Wells

, * Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

(Panel consists of: Bailey, C. J.,

Willson , J. , and Wright, S.C.J.,

sitting by assignment)

(Willson, J., not participating)

This court has considered Marilyn Hanks’s motion to dismiss this appeal and

concludes that the motion should be granted. Therefore, in accordance with this

court ’ s opinion, the appeal is dismissed. The costs incurred by reason of this

appeal are taxed against Marilyn Hanks.
September 18 , 2012



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

RAYMOND FIELD , Appellant
NO. 14

- 12

- 00712

- CR V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

________________________________ This cause was heard on the motion of the appella nt to withdraw notice of appeal. Having considered the motion the Court orders the appeal DISMISSED

. We further order appellant pay all costs expended in the appeal. We further order the mandate be issued immediately.
We further order this decision cert ified below for observance.
Exhibit 32.2

                             FIRST FINANCIAL BANCORP
              CERTIFICATION OF 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 First Financial Bancorp (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2003, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Allen R. Christenson, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 results
                     of operations of the Company.

/s/ Allen R. Christenson
Allen R. Christenson
Chief Financial Officer
March 25, 2004

                                       90
# United States Court of Appeals **For the Eighth Circuit**

___________________________ No. 15-2112

___________________________ Margie Gregor lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant
v. Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of Social Security lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee

____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Hot Springs

____________ Submitted: December 30, 2015 Filed: January 13, 2016 [Unpublished]

____________ Before SMITH, BYE, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

____________ PER CURIAM.Margie Gregor appeals the district court’s 1 order affirming the Commissioner’s denial of disability insurance benefits afte r her hearing before an administrative law judge (ALJ). Following careful de novo revi ew, and for the reasons explained below, we conclude that substantial evidence in th e record as a whole supports the denial of Gregor’s application. SeePerks v. Astrue , 687 F.3d 1086, 1091, 1093 (8th Cir. 2012) (standard of review). For reversal, Gregor challenges the ALJ’ s determination that her fibromyalgia and musculoskeletal complaints failed to meet or equal a listing, and argues that the ALJ’s determination is undermined by add itional evidence: a post-hearing report prepared by her treating rheumatologist, James Logan, M.D. 2Upon careful de novo review, we conclude that Gregor failed to meet her burden of showing the requisite major dysfunction of a joint with the n ecessary clinical evidence and resulting inability to ambulate effectively, see 20 C.F.R Pt. 404, Subpt. P, App. 1 § 1.02 (major dysfunction of a joint); or deformity in one major peripheral weight-bearing joint resulting in inability to ambulate effectively, see 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404, Subpt. P, App. 1 § 14.09 (inflammatory arthritis); Sullivan v. Zebley , 493 U.S. 521, 530-31 (1990) (claimant has burden of estab lishing impairments meet or equal listing). We further conclude that Dr. Logan’s report did not undermine the ALJ’s determination, because it was a conclusory checkbox form that c ited no medical evidence; provided little to no elaboration; and expressed limitations that were not reflected in treatment notes or medical records. See Anderson v. Astrue , 696 F.3d 790, 793-94 (8th Cir. 2012).

1 The Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
2 Gregor’s arguments challenging the AL J’s determination of her residual functional capacity are not properly before us, as she failed to raise this matter to the district court. See Pelkey v. Barnhart , 433 F.3d 575, 580 (8th Cir. 2006) (arguments not articulated before district court are waived). -2-The judgment of the district court is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

_____________________________

-3-
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 Quarterly Report of
Unico, Incorporated (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended November
30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I, Kenneth C. Wiedrich, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, 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:  (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 the
operations of the Company.  Date: January 20, 2009
/s/ Kenneth C. Wiedrich
Kenneth C. Wiedrich
Chief Financial Officer     [A signed original of this written statement required
by Section 906 has been provided to Unico, Incorporated and will be retained by
Unico, Incorporated and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.]