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

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4832 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4832

  To suspend temporarily the rate of duty on 1-Propene, polymer with 
                                ethene.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 26, 2012

 Mr. Wilson of South Carolina introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To suspend temporarily the rate of duty on 1-Propene, polymer with 
                                ethene.

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

SECTION 1. 1-PROPENE, POLYMER WITH ETHENE.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00        1-Propene, polymer  Free            No change      No change      On or before     ''.
                          with ethene (CAS                                                  12/31/2015
                          No. 9010-79-1)
                          (provided for in
                          subheading
                          3902.30.00)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### PATTON v. STATE.

No. 26105.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Dec. 3, 1952.

No attorney on appeal for appellant.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

DAVIDSON, Commissioner.

Under complaint and information charging the offense of unlawfully possessing whisky for the purpose of sale in a dry area and also a prior conviction for a like offense, appellant was convicted and his punishment assessed at a fine of $2,000.

The record before us contains neither a statement of facts nor bills of exception. Nothing is presented for review.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the court.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5060 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5060

        To extend the suspension of duty on p-Aminobenzamide (4-
                            aminobenzamide).

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 27, 2012

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
        To extend the suspension of duty on p-Aminobenzamide (4-
                            aminobenzamide).

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

SECTION 1. P-AMINOBENZAMIDE (4-AMINOBENZAMIDE).

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.25.13 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to p-Aminobenzamide (4-
aminobenzamide)) 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>
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-6494

LARRY LYLE LASKO,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; MR. J. CARAWAY, Warden, is sued in 

his Individual and Official Capacities; MR. D. CARPENDER,

Captain, is sued in his Individual and Official Capacities; 

MR. BRIGHT, Special Investigative Agent, (SIA) is sued in 

his Individual and Official Capacities; MR. K. LILLER, 

Senior Officer, is sued in his Individual and Official 

Capacities; WITH OTHER MR. AND MS. JANE AND JOHN DOES, as 

named in the Previously filed TORT Action Exhibited. Is sued 

in Their Individual and Official Capacities for Unveiling 

Professional Norms,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District 

Judge. (8:13-cv-00597-AW)

Submitted: June 6, 2013 Decided: June 18, 2013

Before MOTZ, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Larry Lyle Lasko, Appellant Pro Se.
2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

Larry Lyle Lasko appeals the district court’s order 

dismissing his civil complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) 

(2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible 

error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the 

district court. See Lasko v. United States, No. 8:13-cv-00597-

AW (D. Md. Mar. 18, 2013). We dispense with oral argument 

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented 

in the materials before this court and argument would not aid 

the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   APR-04-1999
<CASH>                                              15,948
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       36,979
<ALLOWANCES>                                        17,521
<INVENTORY>                                         52,724
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   141,594
<PP&E>                                             320,700
<DEPRECIATION>                                     173,292
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     299,100
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               93,900
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                               100
<OTHER-SE>                                         160,033
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       299,100
<SALES>                                             81,041
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    81,041
<CGS>                                               51,068
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       51,068
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    15,784
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     266
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     13,923
<INCOME-TAX>                                         3,973
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  9,725
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                         9,725
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                          .98
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          .98
        


</TABLE>
# 0> ' LiL, rf/JrfrJt, ,flak <$£(£l.
M: *f/D-/3A5-<5


## A £02±- _...££-. £^2djl&U££. /nt//rr\JU&Ll 

## /Cfa*«ff^.d/frQzte44--. dtje<. 

# jMo^s 4&W/WL-a$x (L 5f4^

/zwo

### L^Z/^W- 2o~ tlih- /xM/zM^-JodLsU 'A l/r\ odjut2s*fj&. JMSdJjl- KJumJL £VK<d /f<G2LU. iASZL.g.. 

## 3& '2*tu ^Ml&SZ^-}. Simeon Ue^HOQ Z^TAfKK) 

### ^JLTllJim-JLlMltlX.

9- ^LEJTLaJiZ 

### MmJXSJ/iu£ JkJllS^o •hL

_REC£IVEDJN_ COURTOF CRIMINAL APPEAL8 NOV 17 2015
-Abel-AG©starGteFk-
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WACO DIVISION

CADDO SYSTEMS, INC. and 511 

TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,

 Plaintiffs

-vsMICROCHIP TECHNOLOGY 

INCORPORATED

 Defendant,

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

6:20-CV-245-ADA

JUDGMENT

This action came before the Court for a trial by jury commencing on June 6, 2022, between 

Plaintiff Caddo Systems, Inc. (“Caddo”) and 511 Technologies, Inc. (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendant 

Microchip Technology Incorporated (“Microchip”). The issues have been tried and the jury 

rendered its unanimous verdict on June 10, 2022 (ECF No. 235). In accordance with the jury 

verdict, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED that:

1. Microchip has directly infringed claims 1 and 2 of U.S. Patent No. 7,191,411 (“the ’411 

patent”).

2. Microchip has directly infringed claims 1, 2, and 3 of U.S. Patent No. 7,216,301 (“the 

’301 patent”).

3. Microchip has directly infringed claims 1 and 4 of U.S. Patent No. 7,640,517 (“the ’517 

patent”).

4. Microchip has directly infringed claims 1, 2, 5, and 8 of U.S. Patent No. 7,725,836

(“the ’836 patent”).

Case 6:20-cv-00245-ADA Document 238 Filed 06/14/22 Page 1 of 2
2

5. Microchip has directly infringed claims 1 and 8 of U.S. Patent No. 8,352,880 (“the ’880 

patent”).

6. Microchip has directly infringed claims 14, 16, 17, and 18 of U.S. Patent No.

10,037,127 (“the ’127 patent”).

7. The Microchip Website is not covered by Caddo’s license to Microsoft.

8. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of Plaintiffs and against Microchip in the lump 

sum of $235,000.00 in damages for Microchip’s infringement of the asserted claims.

9. This FINAL Judgment starts the time for filing any post-trial motions or appeal.

This is a FINAL JUDGMENT.

SIGNED this 14th day of June, 2022.

ALAN D ALBRIGHT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 6:20-cv-00245-ADA Document 238 Filed 06/14/22 Page 2 of 2
#### HUBER v. STATE.

No. 23881.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 7, 1948.

No attorney for appellant.

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

*384BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant received a thirty days jail sentence on a charge of theft of property under the value of $50.

She was tried and sentenced by the court on the 26th day of March, 1947, at which time she gave notice of appeal ánd was allowed thirty days from said date in which to prepare and file her statement of facts and bills of exception. The record shows that on April 23d she filed a request for an extension of time in which to file bills of exceptions and statement of facts. The judge entered his order thereon, dated April 22nd, 1947, which recites that the bills of exception and statement of facts may be made and filed within ninety days after the 25th day of March, 1947. Both the statement of facts and bills of exception were filed with the clerk on the 26th day of June, 1947. The time allowed by the court extended only to the 25th day of June, 1947, and consequently the bills of exception were not filed in time to be considered by us.

A number of exceptions are filed to the court’s charge but the record docs not disclose that they were ever presented to the trial judge. They were not signed by him either as being given or refused. In the face of the record before us, we find no fault with the charge given.

No reversible error appears in the record and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
**Exhibit
      99.4**








**CERTIFICATE
      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 (the “Report”) on the Form 10-QSB of
      Standard Capital Corporation (the “Company”) for the six months ended February
      28, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
      hereof, I, B. Gordon Brooke, Chief Accounting Officer, Chief Financial Officer
      and Director, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my
      knowledge and belief:





1.
      The
      Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or
      15
      (d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





2.
      The
      information contained in this Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the
      Company.











Date:
      March 19, 2007





GORDON
      BROOKE


B.
      Gordon
      Brooke


Chief
      Accounting Officer


Chief
      Financial Officer and Director





-1-
|                                                                                              
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                              
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                
|View History: Annual                                                                          
|View History: Annual                                                                          
|View History:                                                                                 
|                                                                                              
|Mississippi Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Reserves Divestitures (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                              
|                                                                                              
|Mississippi Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Reserves Divestitures (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                              

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 96     | 34     | 28     | 42     | 18     | 17     | 44     | 24     | 2      | 17    
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 31     | 11     | 160    | 39     | 116    | 95     | 10     | 5      | 52     | 2     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
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 amended Annual Report of China Runji Cement Inc. (the "Company") for the year ended August 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Xiangfei Zeng, 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:




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 on the dates and for the periods presented.








Date: April 8, 2011
By: /s/Xiangfei Zeng

Xiangfei Zeng

Chief Financial Officer
July 6, 2015

Mr. Zane Hollingshead

Ms. Jimette Keenan

Western Slope Aerial, LLC

21451 Government Springs Road

Montrose, CO 81403

Dear Mr. Hollingshead and Ms. Keenan:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process your 

request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We entered your March 20, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015-0907), 

but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does not 

comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any

further, you must send us all of the following:

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption 

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you 

seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.
2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brenda Robeson

Program Analyst, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 188 (Wednesday, September 27, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 58087]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-24824]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 
1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225), and all other 
applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company 
and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the 
power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the 
banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, 
including the companies listed below.
    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings 
required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The application also will be available 
for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested 
persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated 
in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the 
acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether 
the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards 
in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, 
nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States. 
Additional information on all bank holding companies may be obtained 
from the National Information Center website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the 
offices of the Board of Governors not later than October 23, 2000.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (Phillip Jackson, Applications 
Officer) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:
    1. Northwest Financial Corp., Spencer, Iowa; to acquire 100 percent 
of the voting shares of Plymouth Bancorporation, Inc., Le Mars, Iowa, 
and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of First National Bank, 
Sioux City, Iowa.
    2. Plymouth Financial Corporation, Plymouth, Michigan; to become a 
bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of 
New Liberty Bank, Plymouth, Michigan.
    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (D. Michael Manies, 
Assistant Vice President) 925 Grand Avenue, Kansas City, Missouri 
64198-0001:
    1. BOK Financial Corporation, Tulsa, Oklahoma; to acquire 100 
percent of the voting shares of CNBT Bancshares, Inc., Bellaire, Texas, 
and thereby indirectly acquire CNBT Bancshares (Delaware), Inc., 
Wilmington, Delaware, and Citizens National Bank of Texas, Bellaire, 
Texas.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 22, 
2000.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Associate Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 00-24824 Filed 9-26-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
#### CROWELL v. STATE.

No. 24415.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 15, 1949.

No appearance for appellant.

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

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Upon a plea of guilty before the court, a jury having been waived, appellant was found guilty of the offense of unlawfully possessing wine for the purpose of sale in a dry area, and his punishment assessed at $100 fine.

The record, as brought forward, contains neither bills of exception nor a statement of facts. Nothing is presented for review and the proceedings appear regular in every respect.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Milton Williams, Appellant.

Judgment of Supreme Court, New York County (Beverly S. Cohen, J., at suppression hearing; Shirley R. Levittan, J., at plea and sentence), rendered February 9, 1988, convicting defendant of attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree and sentencing him, as a predicate felon, to a term of 2 to 4 years in prison, unanimously affirmed.

After noticing defendant and his companion in a parked van, leaning forward and trying to crouch down in order not to be seen, police officers approached the van. Upon seeing the defendant’s companion, who was in the passenger seat, in possession of a marihuana cigarette, the officers shone their flashlights into the vehicle and saw a pistol on the floor of the van and two bags containing marihuana on the beverage tray between the seats. The officers ordered defendant and his companion out of the vehicle, retrieved the drugs and the weapon and arrested both men.

Where an individual’s vehicle is already stopped, the officer needs only an articulable reason to warrant an inquiry. *(People v Blajeski,*125 AD2d 582.) The furtive movements of the defendant and his companion provided a sufficient basis for the approach by the officers. The observation of the marihuana cigarette justified visual inspection of the van which resulted in the discovery of the weapon and two bags of marihuana *(compare, People v Terrero,*139 AD2d 830, 831), if indeed further justification was necessary in order to resort to the use of a flashlight *(see generally, People v Price,*54 NY2d 557, 563).

There is no basis upon which to disturb the suppression court’s findings as to the officers’ credibility. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Ross, Kassal, Smith and Rubin, JJ.