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

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5395 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5395

         To extend the temporary suspension of duty on E-5-(4-
        Chlorobenzylidene)-2,2-dimethyl-1-(1H-1,2,4-triazol- 1-
                        ylmethyl)cyclopentanol.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 7, 2012

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
         To extend the temporary suspension of duty on E-5-(4-
        Chlorobenzylidene)-2,2-dimethyl-1-(1H-1,2,4-triazol- 1-
                        ylmethyl)cyclopentanol.

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

SECTION 1. E-5-(4-CHLOROBENZYLIDENE)-2,2-DIMETHYL-1-(1H-1,2,4-TRIAZOL- 
              1-YLMETHYL)CYCLOPENTANOL.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.03.99 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to E-5-(4-Chlorobenzylidene)-
2,2-dimethyl-1-(1H-1,2,4-triazol- 1-ylmethyl)cyclopentanol) 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to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 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>
```
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Douglas J. Baird, Appellant.

Mercure, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Chemung County (Castellino, J.), rendered April 29, 1988, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crime of murder in the second degree.

In a written confession, defendant stated that John Ludwig made a homosexual advance toward him, as a result of which he "snapped” and repeatedly struck Ludwig over the head with a soda bottle, causing his death. Convicted after trial of murder in the second degree, defendant appeals.

Defendant first asserts that County Court erred in denying the motion to suppress his oral and written statements. We disagree. The record amply supports County Court’s determination that the investigating police officers’ agreement to assist defendant in obtaining psychiatric help did not render the subsequent confession involuntary. We find no evidence suggesting that defendant was so vulnerable or susceptible to the promise that he would be likely to make a false incriminating statement (CPL 60.45 [2] [b] [i]; *see, People v Taber,*115 *694AD2d 126, 127, *lv denied*67 NY2d 657), particularly in view of the fact that defendant himself sought the assurances at a time when he had already begun to incriminate himself. Here, the police conduct fell far short of "deception * * * so fundamentally unfair as to deny due process” *(People v Tarsia,*50 NY2d 1, 11; *see, People v Vaughn,*134 AD2d 789, 790). Equally meritless is the contention that the police continued to question defendant after he expressed a desire to remain silent *(see, Michigan v Mosley,*423 US 96; *People v Ferro,*63 NY2d 316, 322, *cert denied*472 US 1007; *People v Grant,*45 NY2d 366, 373, 376). The record of the *Huntley*hearing makes it clear that defendant asserted nothing more than a right to avoid certain areas of inquiry, including questions about his car and his parents *(see, Michigan v Mosley, supra,*at 103-104), and freely and voluntarily responded to other inquiries.

We also reject the assertion that County Court erred in denying defendant’s motion to prohibit the People from questioning him concerning a prior conviction for attempted murder. The fact that a prior crime is similar to that charged does not of itself preclude its use for impeachment purposes *(see, People v Pavao,*59 NY2d 282, 292). Here, County Court balanced the necessary competing factors and adopted a reasonable *"Sandoval*compromise” by permitting questioning as to the fact of the prior conviction without inquiry concerning the underlying occurrence *(see, People v Ashley,*145 AD2d 782; *People v Lawson,*112 AD2d 457, 461, *lv denied*66 NY2d 764). Finally, County Court properly excluded photographs of nude men found in Ludwig’s apartment, offered as evidence of nothing more than his sexual preference *(see, People v Gagnon,*150 AD2d 918, 919, *affd*75 NY2d 736; *People v Martinez,*144 AD2d 699, 701, *lv denied*73 NY2d 923).

Judgment affirmed. Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Weiss, Levine and Mercure, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Theresa McCray Johnson, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rena Uviller, J.), rendered on June 19, 1989, convicting defendant, upon a plea of guilty, of manslaughter in the second degree and sentencing defendant to a definite term of six months’ imprisonment and 4 *Vi*years’ probation, is unanimously affirmed.

We are unpersuaded that the sentence imposed was unduly *193harsh or severe. Taking into account, “among other things, the crime charged, the particular circumstances of the individual before the court and the purpose of a penal sanction”, we perceive no abuse of discretion warranting a reduction in sentence. *(People v Farrar,*52 NY2d 302, 305.)

Further, defendant was sentenced in accordance with her plea bargain and within statutory guidelines. “Having received the benefit of [her] bargain, defendant should be bound by its terms.” *(People v Felman,*141 AD2d 889, 890, *lv denied*72 NY2d 918.) Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Ross, Carro, Asch and Ellerin, JJ.
#### MARTIN v. STATE.

No. 23082.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 14, 1945.

A. H. Krichamer, of Houston, for appellant.

A. C. Winborn, Cr. Dist. Atty., and E. T. Branch, Asst. Cr. Dist. Atty., both of Houston, and Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

DAVIDSON, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of the burglary of the filling station of S. K. Kelso in Houston, Texas, and given a penalty of two years in the penitentiary.

There are no bills of exceptions in the record. The statement of facts shows that appellant, in company with a companion, broke the glass out of a window in this filling station and entered the building, and, when soon apprehended, had taken the drawer out of the cash register and emptied its contents on the floor. It is true that he had obtained no money or other thing of value, but such is not necessary under the law. See Henderson v. State, 94 Tex.Cr.R. 97, 250 S.W. 688, 690, wherein it quotes from Alexander v. State, 31 Tex. Cr.R. 359, 20 S.W. 756, as follows:

“Though there was no direct evidence of the intent, it might be inferred from the surrounding circumstances. The weight to be given to these was a question properly left to the jury; and when a person enters a building through a window at a late hour of the night, after the lights are extinguished, and no explanation is given of his intent, it may well be inferred that his purpose was to commit larceny, such being the usual intent under such circumstances.”

In the case of Mullins v. State, 35 Tex.Cr.R. 149, 32 S.W. 691, it is said:

“The very fact of breaking and entering a house in the nighttime raises the presumption that it is done with intent to steal, says Mr. Archbold. 2 Archb.Cr.Prac & PL, p. 1107.”

Appellant was not charged with theft; he was only charged with burglary with intent to steal, and the fact of an attempt to rifle the cash register undoubtedly had some weight with the jury in ascertaining his intent.

There is testimony in the record relative to the drunken condition of appellant not only at the time of the alleged burglary but also for three days prior thereto. This evidence only suggests drunkenness, and does not suggest temporary insanity caused by such drunkenness. In the event that such had suggested this type of temporary insanity, same could only have been used by the jury in mitigation of the penalty, if it so desired. The lowest penalty of two years was given appellant, and the jury could not have mitigated the penalty any further than they did by giving the lowest penalty, and we can see no possible error here presented.

The judgment is affirmed.
Exhibit 10.1



The Company's Board of Directors unanimously ratified and approved the following
resolution on April 7, 2004:

     Resolved,  that  Section 2 of each of Standard  Microsystems  Corporation's
Plans listed immediately below:

     1999 Stock Option Plan;
     2000 Stock Option Plan;
     2001 Stock Option and Restricted Stock Plan; and
     2003 Stock Option and Restricted Stock Plan

     shall be, and they hereby are,  amended to insert the following  additional
paragraph at the end thereof:

     Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, the Compensation Committee
may, at its sole  discretion,  delegate its  authority to grant options or other
awards to employees other than executive  officers within parameters  determined
by the Compensation Committee, including the maximum number of shares underlying
each award.
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.                  

###### National Aeronautics and Space Administration

###### [Notice 00-120] 

# AGENCY:

National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 

# ACTION:

Notice of Meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Pub. L. 92-463, as amended, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration announces a meeting of the NASA Advisory Council, Life and Microgravity Sciences and Applications Advisory Committee, NASA-NIH Advisory Subcommittee and Life Sciences Advisory Subcommittee Joint Meeting. 

# DATES:

Wednesday, October 18, 2000, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. 

# ADDRESSES:

National Aeronautics and Space Administration Headquarters, 300 E Street, SW., MIC-3, Room 3H46, Washington, DC 20546. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dr. David Tomko, Code UL, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC 20546, 202/358-0220. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The meeting will be open to the public up to the seating capacity of the room. The agenda for the meeting is as follows: 

—Action Status 

—NASA Life Sciences Division Update 

—Biology and Life Sciences at NASA 

—Status of Studies on ISS NGO 

—Life Sciences Division FY'00 Performance Metrics 

—NASA-NIH Interaction Report 

—Preparation of Committee Findings and Recommendations 

—Review of Committee Findings and Recommendations 

It is imperative that the meeting be held on this date to accommodate the scheduling priorities of the key participants. Visitors will be requested to sign a visitor's register. 

Dated: October 2, 2000.

Beth M. McCormick, 

Federal Advisory Committee Act Management Officer, National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

[FR Doc. 00-25814 Filed 10-6-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7510-01-U
Public Hearing Procedures

 Speakers will be called to the microphone in pairs. 

 When it is your turn to speak, please state your name and your affiliation before you begin 

your testimony. It will help the court reporter if you also spell your name.

 Please limit your testimony to 5 minutes and remain at the microphone until both speakers in 

a pair have finished. 

 Members of the panel may ask clarifying questions. 

 If, in addition to the transcript of your testimony, you would also like the full text of your 

written comments included in the docket, please be sure to give a copy of your written 

comments to our staff at the registration table. 

 We have a timekeeping system consisting of green, yellow and red lights. When you begin 

speaking, the green light will come on. You will have 5 minutes to speak. The yellow light 

will signal that you have 1 minute left to speak. When the red light comes on, 5 minutes has 

passed and you will be asked to complete your testimony.

 Today’s hearing is scheduled from 9:00 a.m. and will continue until 7:00 p.m. The hearing 

will go on recess during the scheduled lunch break from 12:30 p.m. until 2:00 p.m.
Exhibit
      32(a)








This
      Certification is being furnished and shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of
      Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise
      subject to the liability of that section. This Certification shall not be
      incorporated by reference into any registration statement or other document
      pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933, except as otherwise stated in such
      filing.








Certification
      Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63


of
      Title
      18 of the United States Code








In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of the Companies (as defined below) on
      Form
      10-Q (the “Reports”) for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2007 as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Michael G. Morris,
      the chief executive officer of





Southwestern
      Electric Power Company





(the
      “Companies”), certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that, based on my knowledge (i)
      the Reports fully comply with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the
      Reports fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
      and
      results of operations of the Companies.








/s/
      Michael G. Morris


Michael
      G. Morris


Chief
      Executive Officer








May
      4,
      2007








A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      American Electric Power Company, Inc. and will be retained by American Electric
      Power Company, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
      or
      its staff upon request.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5254 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Efka 6225. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 27, 2012 

Mrs. MYRICK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Efka 6225. 

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

3 SECTION 1. EFKA 6225. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Proprietary fatty-acidmodified polyester (CAS 

No. 101–16–7) (provided 

for in subheading 

3402.90.50) ....................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 

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

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


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5254 IH

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

2 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                          UT
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM SOUTHWESTERN
PUBLIC  SERVICE  COMPANY  CONDENSED  BALANCE  SHEET AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 AND
CONDENSED  STATEMENTS  OF  INCOME  AND  CASH  FLOWS  FOR THE NINE  MONTHS  ENDED
SEPTEMBER  30,  1997 AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY  BY  REFERENCE  TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                             1,000
       
<S>                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                            9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                       SEP-30-1997
<BOOK-VALUE>                          PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>            1,700,333
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>            124,812
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                 174,566
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>               175,707
<OTHER-ASSETS>                               0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                       2,175,418
<COMMON>                                     0
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>              348,402
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                    352,668
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>         701,070
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                  100,000
<PREFERRED>                                  0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                   620,572
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                      25,160
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                    0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>         155,175
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>              173
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                    0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                  0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                             0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>         573,268
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>        2,175,418
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>              748,672
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                    36,894
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>             584,600
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>             621,494
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                127,178
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                     (29,178)
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>          98,000
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                42,291
<NET-INCOME>                            55,709
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                  0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>           55,709
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                86,391
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>               33,057
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                  71,126
<EPS-PRIMARY>                            0.000
<EPS-DILUTED>                            0.000
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

***Certificationpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002***

***(18 U.S.C. Section 1350)***

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of American States Water Company andGolden State Water Company (the “Registrant”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterended March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the “Report”), I Robert J. Sprowls, Chief Executive Officerof the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuantto § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

 

(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 Registrant.

 
| /s/  ROBERT J. SPROWLS   |   |
|--------------------------|--------|
| Robert  J. Sprowls       |   |
| Chief  Executive Officer |   |
|                     |   |
| Date:  May 11, 2009 |   |

 

----
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WACO DIVISION

WSOU INVESTMENTS, LLC D/B/A

BRAZOS LICENSING AND 

DEVELOPMENT,

Plaintiff,

v.

MICROSOFT CORPORATION,

Defendant.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00454-ADA 

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00455-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00456-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00457-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00458-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00459-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00460-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00461-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00462-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00463-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00464-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-CV-00465-ADA

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO RESET PRETRIAL 

CONFERENCE AND TRIAL DATES

The Court, having considered the Joint Motion to Reset Pretrial Conference and Trial 

Dates, hereby ORDERS that the motion is GRANTED.

The final pretrial conference for cases 6:20-CV-00455, -457, -459, and -463 is reset to

March 17, 2022, and trial in cases 6:20-CV-00455, -457, -459, and -463 is reset to April 5, 2022.

The final pretrial conference for the remaining cases is reset to April 4, 2022, and trial for the 

remaining cases is reset to April 18, 2022.

SIGNED this _________ day of _________________ 2021.

___________________________________

HONORABLE ALAN D ALBRIGHT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 6:20-cv-00461-ADA Document 79-1 Filed 09/15/21 Page 1 of 1
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5425 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain footwear with outer soles and 

uppers of rubber or plastics, covering the ankle, other than work footwear. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 7, 2012 

Mr. HUELSKAMP introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain footwear with 

outer soles and uppers of rubber or plastics, covering 

the ankle, other than work footwear. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN FOOTWEAR WITH OUTER SOLES AND 

4 UPPERS OF RUBBER OR PLASTICS, COV5 ERING THE ANKLE, OTHER THAN WORK 

6 FOOTWEAR. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

8 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

9 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

10 new heading: 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5425 IH

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Footwear with outer soles 

and uppers of rubber or plastics, covering the ankle, other 

than work footwear, the foregoing for persons other than 

for men or women (provided 

for in subheading 

6402.91.40) ........................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 

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

2 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 

3 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

4 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
MARJORIE K. CONNER

ATTORNEY

700 WEST VIEW TERRACE

ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA 22302 

MAY 12, 2015 

703-706-5917 

mkconner@mkconnerlaw.com 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Operations 

West Building Ground Floor 

Room W12-140 

1200 New Jersey Ave., S.E. 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

 Re: CellAntenna Corporation 

 Petition for Exemption under Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act 

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2015-1010 

Dear USDOT: 

 CellAntenna Corporation (“CellAntenna”) hereby supplements its petition for exemption 

filed pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (“Reform 

Act”), and Section 11.81 of the FAA’s rules, 14 C.F.R. § 11.81, in the Regulatory Docket 

Number captioned above. 

By this supplement, CellAntenna provides the aircraft make(s), model(s), and type(s)(i.e. 

fixed wing, rotorcraft, lighter-than-air) for the proposed UAS operation. 

 CellAntenna proposes to use a four different aircraft, but the maximum weight (including 

payload) on any flight will be 55 pounds or less. CellAntenna’s proposed aircraft are: 

DJI S1000 Spreading Wings DJI 450 Flame Wheel Quadcopter 

DJI Inspire DJI 550 Flame Wheel Hexacopter 

 The manual for each of these aircraft was provided in the original filing. 

 Please give me a call with any questions or concerns about OSD’s petitions or this letter. 

 Very truly yours, 

 

 Marjorie K. Conner 

 Counsel for CellAntenna Corporation 

cc: CellAntenna Corporation