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

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5514 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5514

   To suspend temporarily the rate of duty on Modified Vinylchloride-
                    Hydroxypropylacrylate copolymer.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 7, 2012

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To suspend temporarily the rate of duty on Modified Vinylchloride-
                    Hydroxypropylacrylate copolymer.

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

SECTION 1. MODIFIED VINYLCHLORIDE-HYDROXYPROPYLACRYLATE COPOLYMER.

    (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        Modified            Free            No change      No change      On or before     ''.
                          Vinylchloride-                                                    12/31/2015
                          Hydroxypropylacry
                          late copolymer
                          (CAS No. 114653-
                          42-8) (provided
                          for in subheading
                          3904.40.00)......

    (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to articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 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>
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WACO WAO DIVISION

WSOU INVESTMENTS LLC

vs.

MICROSOFT CORPORATION

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL NO:

WA:20-CV-00456-ADA

ORDER RESETTING MARKMAN MARKMAN HEARING HEARING

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above entitled and numbered case is reset for

MARKMAN HEARING by zoomoom on Tuesday, March 23, 2021 at 10:00 AM.

reset

IT 22nd day of March, 2021.

Alan D Albright

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 6:20-cv-00456-ADA Document 56 Filed 03/22/21 Page 1 of 1
**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 Annual Report ofOragenics, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Brian J. Bohunicky, Chief Financial Officer ofthe 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

A signed original of this written certification has been provided to the company and will be retained by the company and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request. 

Dated this 30th day of March, 2011.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5000 

To extend the temporary reduction of duty on methoxyfenozide. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 27, 2012 

Mr. BURTON of Indiana (for himself and Mr. YOUNG of Indiana) introduced 

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary reduction of duty on 

methoxyfenozide. 

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

3 SECTION 1. METHOXYFENOZIDE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.32.93 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 methoxyfenozide) is amended by striking the date in the 

7 effective period column and inserting ‘‘12/31/2015’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5000 IH

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

2 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 15.

Southwestern Public Service Company:

We have made a review, in accordance with standards  established by the American
Institute  of  Certified  Public   Accountants,   of  the  unaudited   condensed
consolidated  interim  financial  information  of  Southwestern  Public  Service
Company and  subsidiaries  for the periods ended  November 30, 1996 and 1995, as
indicated  in our report dated  January 10, 1997;  because we did not perform an
audit, we expressed no opinion on that information.

We are aware  that our  report  referred  to above,  which is  included  in your
Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q for the  quarter  ended  November  30,  1996,  is
incorporated by reference in Registration  Statement Nos. 33-53171 and 333-05199
on Form S-3,  Registration  Statement No. 33-64951 on Form S-4, and Registration
Statement Nos. 33-27452 and 33-57869 on Form S-8.

We are also aware that the aforementioned report,  pursuant to Rule 436(c) under
the  Securities  Act of  1933,  is not  considered  a part  of the  Registration
Statement  prepared  or  certified  by an  accountant  or a report  prepared  or
certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.


Deloitte & Touche LLP

January 10, 1997
Dallas, Texas
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SAN ANTONIO DIVISION

TEXAS DEMOCRATIC PARTY, )

GILBERTO HINOJOSA, Chair of the )

Texas Democratic Party, JOSEPH DANIEL )

CASCINO, SHANDA MARIE SANSING, )

and BRENDA LI GARCIA, )

)

Plaintiffs, )

)

V. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. SA-20-CA-438-FB

)

GREG ABBOTT, Governor of Texas, )

KEN PAXTON, Texas Attorney General, )

RUTH HUGHS, Texas Secretary of )

State, DANA DEBEAUVOIR, Travis )

County Clerk, and JACQUELYN F. )

CALLANEN, Bexar County Elections )

Administrator, )

)

 Defendants. )

ORDER ON MOTION TO INTERVENE

Before the Court are the Motion of League of United Latin American Citizens and Texas League

of United Latin American Citizens to Intervene as Plaintiffs Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

24 (docket no. 30) and the State Defendants’ Response to LULAC and Texas LULAC’s Motion to

Intervene (docket no. 37). 

This issue has come before the Court within forty-eight hours of the scheduled hearing which

has taken an enormous amount of technological planning and time because of current public health

concerns. For that reason and other reasons stated in the defendants’ response, the motion to intervene

is DENIED at this time.

To the extent that this case may move forward after the preliminary injunction issue is resolved

in this Court and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, the Court will reconsider the motion to intervene.

Case 5:20-cv-00438-FB Document 40 Filed 05/13/20 Page 1 of 2
The Court previously entered an Order (docket no. 15) concerning physical presence and virtual

access for the hearing. The Court will continue to enforce that Order.

Accordingly, intervenors and their counsel may access the hearing through audio live stream to

hear the proceedings by accessing the Western District of Texas website.

It is so ORDERED.

SIGNED this 13th day of May, 2020.

 _________________________________________________

 FRED BIERY

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

-2-

Case 5:20-cv-00438-FB Document 40 Filed 05/13/20 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5302 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5302

   To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain artificial 
                         filament single yarns.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 27, 2012

  Mr. Rothman of New Jersey introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain artificial 
                         filament single yarns.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN ARTIFICIAL FILAMENT SINGLE YARNS.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.26.12 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to certain artificial filament 
single yarns) 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>
```
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AUSTIN DIVISION

HAROLD WILLIAM VAN ALLEN,

Plaintiff

v.

CHIEF JUDGE OF THE FIRST 

CIRCUIT, ET AL,

Defendants

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CASE NO. 1:20-CV-0534- LY-SH

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

TO: THE HONORABLE LEE YEAKEL

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Before the Court is Plaintiff Harold William Van Allen’s Complaint. Dkt. 1. The Court submits 

this Report and Recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 72(b), and Rule 1(d) of Appendix C of the Local Rules of the United States District 

Court for the Western District of Texas.

I. Background

On May 18, 2020, the Court ordered Plaintiff to submit either the Court’s $400 filing fee or a 

completed application to proceed in forma pauperis within thirty days. Dkt. 3. The Court also 

warned Plaintiff that failure to comply with the Court’s Order would result in the Court 

recommending that his case be dismissed. Id. Plaintiff has failed to pay the required fee or submit 

an application to proceed in forma pauperis. 

A district court may dismiss an action sua sponte for failure to prosecute or to comply with 

any order of court under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). McCullough v. Lynaugh, 835 F.2d 

1126, 1127 (5th Cir. 1988). Because Plaintiff has failed to abide by a Court Order and to prosecute 

his case, this lawsuit should be dismissed. 

Case 1:20-cv-00534-LY Document 4 Filed 07/20/20 Page 1 of 2
II. Recommendation

The undersigned therefore RECOMMENDS that the District Court DISMISS Harold 

William Van Allen’s lawsuit without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b).

III. Warnings

The parties may file objections to this Report and Recommendation. A party filing objections 

must specifically identify those findings or recommendations to which objections are being made. 

The District Court need not consider frivolous, conclusive, or general objections. See Battle v. 

United States Parole Comm’n, 834 F.2d 419, 421 (5th Cir. 1987). A party’s failure to file written 

objections to the proposed findings and recommendations contained in this Report within fourteen 

(14) days after the party is served with a copy of the Report shall bar that party from de novo 

review by the District Court of the proposed findings and recommendations in the Report and, 

except on grounds of plain error, shall bar the party from appellate review of unobjected-to 

proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the District Court. See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 636(b)(1); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150-53 (1985); Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 

79 F.3d 1415, 1428-29 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).

SIGNED on July 20, 2020.

SUSAN HIGHTOWER

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:20-cv-00534-LY Document 4 Filed 07/20/20 Page 2 of 2
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-1791
HAZELENE B. MCRAE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SHIRLEY S. CHATER, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Rockingham. James A. Beaty, Jr., District Judge. (CA-94-727-3) Argued: May 6, 1997 Decided: June 19, 1997 Before MURNAGHAN and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and STAMP, Chief United States District Judge for the Northern District of West Virginia, sitting by designation. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
ARGUED: John Francis Eichorn, Rockingham, North Carolina, for Appellant. John Carl Stoner, Assistant Regional Counsel, Office of the General Counsel, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Atlanta, Georgia, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Tamela G. Clayton, Rockingham, North Carolina, for Appellant. Frank W. Hunger, Assistant Attorney General, Walter C. Holton, Jr., United States Attorney, Mary Ann Sloan, Acting Chief Counsel, Region III, Mack A. Davis, Acting Deputy Chief Counsel, Haila Naomi Kleinman, Supervisory Assistant Regional Counsel, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Atlanta, Georgia, for Appellee.2 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Plaintiff-Appellant Hazelene McRae filed claims for a period of disability, disability insurance benefits, and supplemental security income. The Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") denied her claims because he found that she retained the residual functional capacity to perform a limited range of light and sedentary work. The district court affirmed. McRae stated on her benefits application and testified at the ALJ hearing that she performed a wide range of housework and cared for her invalid family members on a daily basis, she failed to introduce any medical evidence that she was totally disabled, anda vocational expert testified that many jobs existed in North Carolina that McRae could perform. We therefore find that substantial evidence supports the ALJ's finding. See Smith v. Schweiker, 795 F.2d 343, 345 (4th Cir. 1986). The district court's opinion is, therefore,

AFFIRMED .
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Communications Commission

          - 47 CFR Part 73 
          - [DA 00-2104; MM Docket No. 00-109; RM-9899] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Communications Commission. 

# ACTION:

Final rule; correction. 

# SUMMARY:

                        This document corrects a final rule concerning Radio Broadcasting Service; Ravenwood, MO published in the                         **Federal Register**                         on September 26, 2000, 65 FR 57745.                     

# DATES:

Effective October 30, 2000. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kathleen Scheuerle, Mass Media Bureau, (202) 418-2180. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    We published a document amending part 73 in the                     **Federal Register**                     of September 26, 2000, 65 FR 57745 (FR Doc. 00-24647). In that document, the Commission is correcting § 73.202(b) to reflect a change in the community in the Table of FM Allotments from Ravenwood, Florida to Ravenwood, Missouri. In rule FR Doc. 00-24647, published September 26, 2000, 65 FR 57745, make the following corrections:                

# PART 73—[CORRECTED] 

§ 73.202 

1. On page 57745, in the third column, in amendatory instruction 2, in the second line, correct “Florida” to read “Missouri.” 

Federal Communications Commission. 

John A. Karousos, 

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 00-26013 Filed 10-10-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
#### WOODS v. STATE.

No. 23866.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 7, 1948.

No appearance, for appellant.

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

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was charged with the offense of possessing whisky for the purpose of sale in a dry area. He entered a plea of guilty to said charge and the court assessed a fine of $200, a jury having been waived.

The record contains no statement of facts nor bills of exception. The proceedings are regular. Nothing is presented for our consideration.

The judgment is affirmed.
<PAGE>





                                                                    Exhibit 99.2


                           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 Annual Report of Atlas America Public #11-2002 Ltd. (the
"Partnership") on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Nancy J. McGurk, Chief Financial Officer of the Managing General Partner,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 Partnership.




/s/ Nancy J. McGurk


Nancy J. McGurk
Chief Financial Officer of the Managing General Partner
March 28, 2003
Case 5:20-cv-00571-OLG   Document 37-39   Filed 01/15/21   Page 1 of 1
-79 -78 -77 -76 -75 -74

38 39 40


### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 500 18 12 06 00 07/20 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 20 Jul 06

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 38.92 N 77.01 WMeters AGL
#### ASSOCIATES INVESTMENT CO. v. HILL.

No. 9756.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Austin.

May 4, 1949.

Rehearing Denied May 25, 1949.

*366Smith & Pollard, Austin, (W. R. Smith, Jr., of Austin, of counsel), for appellant.

J. Travis Blakeslee and Thomas D. Blackwell, both of Austin, for appellee.

RAYMOND GRAY, Justice.

Upon a nonjury trial the • trial court awarded appellee a judgment against appellant for double the amount of alleged usurious interest paid.

The record shows that appellee purchased an automobile from Leo M. Black Motor Company through a Mr. Ballard as an agent, or salesman, for the company. The price agreed to be paid for the automobile was $869.13. Appellee was allowed $304 for his car, paid $45.33 in cash, and for the $530 unpaid balance of the purchase price appellee executed a note and chattel mortgage. In the chattel mortgage the following recitals are made: delivered price $869.13; sales tax and “doc” fee $10.20; total cash price $879.33, less cash $45.33; allowance on car traded in $304; total down payment $349.33; unpaid balance of cash price $530; “Insurance, Recording and Finance Charges $157.45.” Time balance due $687.45. The last sum was payable in fifteen equal monthly installments of $45.83 each. The note and chattel mortgage were transferred to appellant who paid Leo M. Black Motor Company $530 therefor. Appellee paid the full sum of $687.45 to appellant. The amount of insurance paid was $37.50; no recording charges are shown, which left “finance charges” $119.95, and the judgment was for $239.90.

The evidence mentions a note executed by appellee, payable to the order of Leo M. Black Motor Company, for the principal sum of $687.45. The chattel mortgage describes this note, but we do not find it in the record before us. However, in the request for admissions delivered to appellant, a request is made for an admission that this note was indorsed to appellant. This request is not answered.

The evidence shows only one price ($869.13) was asked for the automobile sold to appellee. After the deductions of payments made by appellee, there was left the sum of $530 of the purchase price of said automobile unpaid and for which ap-pellee obligated himself to pay $687.45. Of this sum $119.95 was “finance charges.”

Except only as to the issue of actual notice which is not raised by the evidence before us, the questions of law here are the same as presented in Associates Investment Co. v. Baker, 221 S.W.2d 363, this day decided by this court. For the reasons stated in that opinion, which is here referred to and adopted, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.