alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Henry Jasper RICHARDSON, Jr., Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 28535.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 7, 1956.

*845No attorney for appellant of record on appeal.

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

MORRISON, Presiding Judge.

The offense is a violation of Article 725b, Section. 2, Vernon’s Ann.P.C., ■ which denounces the possession of paraphernalia for using narcotic drugs; the punishment, 10 years. ■

Police Chief Watson testified that he observed .an automobile cutting in-and out of traffic and- travelling at a -.high, rate of speed through the City of • Hurst on-the night in question', that he gave chase and when he overtook the same discovered that the appellant, who- was the driver thereof, appeared to be intoxicated. He stated that the appellant’s eyes were glassy, that he leaned up against his automobile but he was unable to detect the odor of alcohol on his breath. The appellant was placed under arrest and carried to the police station, where his automobile was searched. A spoon which was black on the bottom, a hypodermic needle, and two eyedroppers were removed therefrom. Chief Watson then inspected the appellant’s arms and found thereon a number of' old and new bumps "that lobked like “wasp stings.”

. The following day after his release from jail on bond, the appellant- -returned to Chief Watson’s office to secure his automobile. According to the chief, the appellant told him that he was a narcotic user, gave the name of his source of supply; and -said that he had had a shot shortly before he was arrested the night ‘before. ■'

Officer Glass- of the 'Narcotic ' Division identified the items introduced as paraphernalia commonly used by narcotic addicts.

The appellant did not testify or offer any evidence in his own behalf. .

No brief has been filed, but we do find certain bills of exception to the introduction into evidence of the fruits of the search of the appellant’s automobile.

If the officer observed the appellant violating a traffic law, he wa's authorized in-arresting him and searching his person. -If after the ar-rest, -he observed that the appellant was intoxicated or under the influence of a narcotic drug, he was then authorized to search his automobile. Article 216, Vernon’s Anri.C.C.Pl; Brown v. State, 159 Tex.Cr.R. 306, 263 S.W.2d 261; Soileau v. State, 156 Tex.Cr.R. 544, 244 S.W.2d 224.

Finding the evidence sufficient to support the conviction and no reversible error appearing, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4636 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4636

  To extend the suspension of duty on certain ethylene-vinyl acetate 
                              copolymers.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 25, 2012

 Mr. Altmire introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To extend the suspension of duty on certain ethylene-vinyl acetate 
                              copolymers.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN ETHYLENE-VINYL ACETATE COPOLYMERS.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.24.55 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to certain ethylene-vinyl 
acetate copolymers) is amended by striking the date in the effective 
period column and inserting ``12/31/2015''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section applies to 
goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 
the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
|                                                                                           
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                           
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                             
|View History: Annual                                                                       
|View History: Annual                                                                       
|View History:                                                                              
|                                                                                           
|No chart available.                                                                        
|No chart available.                                                                        
|                                                                                           
|                                                                                           
|Arkansas Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves Extensions (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                           

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | --     | --     | --     | --    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | --     | --     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4573 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4573

  To extend and modify the reduction of duty on Bentazon, sodium salt.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 24, 2012

 Mr. Luetkemeyer introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                    the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To extend and modify the reduction of duty on Bentazon, sodium salt.

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

SECTION 1. BENTAZON, SODIUM SALT.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.05.10 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to Bentazon, sodium salt) is 
amended--
            (1) by striking ``2.6%'' and inserting ``1.23%''; and
            (2) by striking the date in the effective period column and 
        inserting ``12/31/2015''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) apply to 
goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 
the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 31.2
 Certification of Chief Financial Officer  Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
      a)
    
    designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls
and procedures to be designed under our 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 report is being
prepared;b)
    
    designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal
control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation
of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles;c)
    
    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; andd)
    
    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; and
  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;
andb)
    
    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
 Date: March 15, 2010
    By:
    /s/    Christopher L. NagelChristopher L. NagelVice President, Finance and

Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4745 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4745

      To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Cypermethrin.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 25, 2012

   Mr. Johnson of Illinois introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Cypermethrin.

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

SECTION 1. CYPERMETHRIN.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.11.74 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to Cypermethrin) is amended by 
striking the date in the effective period column and inserting ``12/31/
2015''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4797 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4797

 To extend the temporary suspension of duty on combination single slot 
                       toaster and toaster ovens.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 25, 2012

Mr. Scott of Virginia introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To extend the temporary suspension of duty on combination single slot 
                       toaster and toaster ovens.

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

SECTION 1. COMBINATION SINGLE SLOT TOASTER AND TOASTER OVENS.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.23.40 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to combination single slot 
toaster and toaster ovens) is amended by striking the date in the 
effective period column and inserting ``12/31/2015''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
RULE 13A-14(A) / 15D-14(A)
  1.
    
    I have read this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of SIFCO Industries, 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
periods presented in this quarterly report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officers and I are 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 have:
 a.
    
    designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such internal
controls and procedures to be designated under our 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 being prepared; andb.
    
    paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238, 33-8545,34-51293 and 34-47986;
andc.
    
    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; andb.
    
    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 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,
the registrants internal control over financial reporting;
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officers 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 of registrants board of directors (or persons performing
the equivalent functions):
 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; andb.
    
    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting.
 Date: February 14, 2006
    
    /s/
    
    Jeffrey P. GotschallJeffrey P. GotschallChairman of the Board andChief Executive Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-6111

NICHOLAS WARNER JONES, a/k/a Charles Jones,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

THOMAS R. CORCORAN, Warden, Maryland House of

Correction-Annex; KATHLEEN LANDERKIN, Lieutenant, Administrative Remedy Coordinator;

MICHAEL R. HILL, L.P.N., Maryland Department

of Correction Infection Control Department; S.

ROBERTSON, R.N., Maryland Department of Correction Infection Control Department; PARRIS

N. GLENDENING, Governor, The State House;

BISHOP L. ROBINSON, Secretary of Public Safety

and Correctional Services; RICHARD A. LANHAM,

SR., Commissioner of Division of Correction;

WILLIAM L. SMITH, Warden of The Jessup,

Maryland House of Correction Annex; CHERYL

SAUNDERS, R.N.; CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SYSTEMS,

INCORPORATED, Health Contractor,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-97-

350-L)

Submitted: May 14, 1998 Decided: June 2, 1998

Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.
2

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Nicholas Warner Jones, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr.,

Attorney General, Stephanie Judith Lane-Weber, Assistant Attorney

General, Baltimore, Maryland; Philip Melton Andrews, Karl Joseph

Nelson, KRAMON & GRAHAM, P.A., Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Jones v. Corcoran, No. CA-97-350-L (D. Md. Jan. 13, 1998).

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court

and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
EXHIBIT 15.1





Auditor’s Consent





Statement by Experts








CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Experts” and to the use of our report dated April 30, 2013 in the Form 20-F: Annual Report dated May 11, 2013, Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, of Global Green Matrix Corp. formerly known as Poly-Pacific International Inc. for the registration of 80,966,462 shares of its common stock.






/s/ K.R. Margetson Ltd.Vancouver, BC

SignedMay 11, 2013

Chartered Accountant
VIA EMAIL 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY 

AND POLLUTION PREVENTION 

September 15, 2014 

Subject: Cancellation ofPHMB product-specific DCI issued July 9, 2014 

Dear Registrant: 

I am writing to inform you that EPA has cancelled the following Data Call-in (DCI) that was 

issued on July 9, 2014 as part of the Poly (hexamethylenebiguanides) hydrochloride (PHMB) 

reregistration (Case# 3122): PDCI-111801-30511. This letter also serves as notice that EPA 

intends to reissue the appropriate data requirements under PDCI-111801-35037. 

All requirements associated with PDCI-111801-30511 have been cancelled and no additional 

action is required under that data call-in. The Agency cancelled the DCI because, due to an 

internal processing error, the original list of data requirements was incomplete. All PHMB 

registrants will receive the new DCI electronically via Email along with instructions for 

complying with the DCI requirements. 

This letter will be placed in docket EPA-HQ-OPP-2004-0305 at regulations.gov as part of the 

public record and you are encouraged to retain a copy for your records. You do not need to 

respond to this letter. If you have chemical-specific questions or need assistance responding to 

the new DCI, please contact the chemical review manager (CRM) identified in the DCI. 

Susan Lewis, 

c-Y'cX~ Director 

Antimicrobials Division 

Office of Pesticide Programs
#### LONG v. STATE.

No. 23466.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 6, 1946.

Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

Conviction is for engaging in a riot, punishment assessed at 12 months’ confinement in the county jail.

Omitting the formal parts, the indictment charges that: “ * * * Phillip Long * * * did then and there unlawfully engage in a riot, by then and there procuring the release of one Johnnie Mae Jackson, alias Johnnie Mae Barker Gardner, from the lawful custody of a police officer, of the City of Dallas, to-wit, John Phillip Barber, the said Johnnie Mae Jackson, alias Johnnie Mae Barker Gardner, having been then and there arrested for a misdemeanor offense; * *

Appellant filed a motion to quash the indictment on the ground that it charged no offense. This motion should have been sustained. We adopt the following from the brief of our State’s Attorney.

“The prosecution was evidently brought under Article 463 of the Penal Code, which reads as follows, to-wit: ‘Whoever by engaging in a riot shall rescue any prisoner lawfully arrested or imprisoned for a misdemeanor shall be confined in jail not less than six nor more than twelve months.’

“Article 455 of the Penal Code reads as follows: ‘If the persons unlawfully assembled together do or attempt to do any illegal act, all those engaged in such illegal act are guilty of riot;’ and Article 471 of the Penal Code reads as follows: ‘The indictment must state the illegal act which was' the object of the meeting, or which they proceeded to do if the assembly was originally lawful, and must state and it must be proven on the trial, that three or more persons were assembled, and their names must be given if known; if unknown, it must be so alleged.’

“* * * It is noted that the indictment does' not follow the requirements set out in Article 471 of the Penal Code, and therefore, in our opinion, wholly fails to charge an offense; and therefore the State respectfully suggests that the judgment of the trial court should be reversed and the prosecution dismissed.” . _■

We refer to Form 219, Wilson’s Tex.Cr. Forms, 5th Ed., page 148. It is apparent that the indictment as drawn charges appellant with engaging in a riot by himself, and it is perfectly clear from the provisions of Art. 471 of the Penal Code that this is not sufficient.

The judgment is reversed and the prosecution ordered dismissed.