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

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5124 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on strontium halophosphate 

doped with europium. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 27, 2012 

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

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on strontium 

halophosphate doped with europium. 

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

3 SECTION 1. STRONTIUM HALOPHOSPHATE DOPED WITH 

4 EUROPIUM. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.22.73 of the Har6 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

7 strontium halophosphate doped with europium) is amend8 ed by striking the date in the effective period column and 

9 inserting ‘‘12/31/2015’’. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5124 IH

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

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

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

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
EPA and DoD Meeting February 28 , 2013 Attendees EPA

– Mark Barolo, Linda Gerber, Erin Knighton, L iz McDermott, Tim Smith , Cho Yi Kwan DoD

– Ed Miller Army

– Bob Luther DLA Energy

– Laura Fleming , Matt Young, Scott Alla n, Everett Bowl, Diane Parks EPA and DoD met to discuss a number of issues from the proposed revisions to the UST regulations. The discussion included the inventory of airport h ydrant systems and field constructed tanks as well as different release detection methods for these systems

.
KARNOVA AUSTIN,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent.

___________________________/

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-3425

Opinion filed August 12, 2016.

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus -- Original Jurisdiction.

Karnova Austin, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

DISMISSED. See Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. 2004).

B.L. THOMAS, WETHERELL, and WINSOR, JJ., CONCUR.
#### BARROW v. STATE.

No. 25586.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Dec. 19, 1951.

No attorney on appeal for appellant.

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

WOODLEY, Commissioner.

Appellant was convicted for burglary, and the jury having found that he had been ¡previously convicted of the prior offense of burglary charged in the indictment, he was sentenced to serve 12 years in the penitentiary.

Appellant was found in the nighttime in a building owned by J. R. Hitri. The lock on the front door had been broken,, and appellant had a wrecking bar in his. hands.

The previous conviction for burglary charged in the indictment was admitted by appellant, and established by the state’s, evidence.

Appellant denied that he was in the build-. ing of Mr. Hitri, but the jury elected to. accept the officer’s testimony that he was. found there.

There are no bills of exceptions in the record.

All proceedings appear to be regular and the evidence sustains the conviction.

The judgment is affirmed.

■Opinion approved by the Court.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-60833

Summary Calendar

DOUGLAS RAFAEL PEREZ-REYES,

Petitioner

v.

LORETTA LYNCH, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A098 112 260

Before DAVIS, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Douglas Rafael Perez-Reyes, a native and citizen of El Salvador, 

petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) 

dismissing his appeal from an order of the Immigration Judge denying his 

motion to reopen. Perez-Reyes maintains that threats made by a gang member 

against his family show changed country conditions in El Salvador that 

warrant reopening his proceedings. 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 22, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 14-60833 Document: 00513317817 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/22/2015
No. 14-60833

2

Ordinarily, an alien must file a motion to reopen within 90 days of the 

date on which the final administrative decision is entered, and an alien may 

file only one such motion. 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i). The time and numerical 

limitations do not apply, however, if the basis of the motion is to apply for 

asylum relief and is based upon “changed circumstances arising in the country 

of nationality or in the country to which deportation has been ordered, if such 

evidence [of change] is material and was not available and could not have been 

discovered or presented at the previous hearing.” § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(ii). 

We review the denial of a motion to reopen “under a highly deferential 

abuse-of-discretion standard.” Zhao v. Gonzales, 404 F.3d 295, 303 (5th Cir. 

2005). The BIA’s decision will be upheld “so long as it is not capricious, racially 

invidious, utterly without foundation in the evidence, or otherwise so irrational 

that it is arbitrary rather than the result of any perceptible rational approach.” 

Zhao, 404 F.3d at 304. “[M]otions to reopen deportation proceedings are 

disfavored, and the moving party bears a heavy burden.” Altamirano-Lopez v. 

Gonzales, 435 F.3d 547, 549 (5th Cir. 2006) (internal citation and quotation 

marks omitted). Perez-Reyes has not met these standards. Accordingly, his 

petition for review is DENIED. 

 Case: 14-60833 Document: 00513317817 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/22/2015
#### SAENZ v. HINOJOSA et ux.

No. 12687.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

May 19, 1954.

Lewright, Dyer, Sorrell & Redford and James W. Wray, Jr., Corpus Christi, for appellant.

R. F. Luna, San Diego, for appellees.

POPE, Justice.

This is an appeal from an order overruling Aaron Saenz’ plea of privilege to be sued in Nueces -County.

Because the appellees have filed no brief, we accept the statements in appellant’s brief as correct. Rule 419, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Appellant -complains that there was no competent proof that Homero Hinojosa and his wife were injured by reason of the collision between their vehicle and appellant’s automobile. Only one witness testified on the trial. He was a deputy - sheriff, who arrived at the scene of the accident after it had occurred. He gained his knowledge of the collision either from observation of the scene of the accident or from hearsay statements. The witness testified with regard to the location of the two vehicles, as he saw them after the accident, but he failed to testify or prove that the plaintiffs’ injuries were suffered in the collision with the vehicle driven by Saenz. Eye witnesses that were available, including Mr. and Mrs. Hinojosa themselves, failed to testify. *477“Presumptions are indulged in only to supply facts, and do not arise where the facts are known. Presumptions must be' based on some necessity, and the court will not go into the domain of presumptions where direct proof can he obtained.” 31 C.J.S., Evidence, § 114; Miller & Miller Motor Freight Lines v. Hunt, Tex.Civ.App., 242 S.W.2d 919.

The evidence is also lacking in proof of other essentials, under Vernon’s Ann.'Civ. St. § 9a, art. 1995, which appellees relied upon. The judgment is reversed and the cause ordered transferred to Nueces 'County in accordance with the provisions of Rule 89, T.R.C.P.
**Exhibit 23.3**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporation by reference inRegistration Statement No. 333-135787 on Form S-4, in Registration Statements No. 333-117037, 333-117484 and 333-119441 on Form S-3, and in Registration Statements No. 333-136208, 333-132867, 333-128072, 333-124090, 333-117828, 333-112490, and333-103671 on Form S-8 of our report dated March 30, 2005, relating to the consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2004 of Accredited Home Lenders Holding Co., and of our reportdated March 30, 2005 (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to economic and operational dependency on its parent) related to the statements of operations, stockholders’ equity andcomprehensive income, and cash flows for the period inception (May 4, 2004) to December 31, 2004 of Accredited Mortgage Loan REIT Trust all appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Accredited Home Lenders Holding Co. for the year endedDecember 31, 2006. 

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP 

San Diego,California 

November 6, 2007
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5468 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5468

   To suspend temporarily the duty on standard-grade ferroniobium or 
                            ferrocolombium.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 7, 2012

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To suspend temporarily the duty on standard-grade ferroniobium or 
                            ferrocolombium.

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

SECTION 1. STANDARD-GRADE FERRONIOBIUM OR FERROCOLOMBIUM.

    (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        Ferroniobium        Free            No change      No change      On or before     ''.
                          (provided for in                                                  12/31/2015
                          subheading
                          7202.93.80)......

    (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>
```
<PAGE>   1

                                                                   EXHIBIT 12(b)


           UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY AND CONSOLIDATED SUBSIDIARY
                             AND AFFILIATE COMPANIES

                COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

                                   (UNAUDITED)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                              Six Months Ended June 30,
                                                                              -------------------------
Millions of Dollars Except Ratios                                                 2000           1999
---------------------------------                                                 ----           ----
<S>                                                                          <C>                <C>
Earnings:
   Net Income..............................................................     $  478           $355
   Undistributed equity earnings...........................................         60            (19)
                                                                                ------           ----
   Total...................................................................        538            336
                                                                                ------           ----
Income Taxes...............................................................        270            175
                                                                                ------           ----
Fixed Charges:
   Interest expense including amortization of debt discount................        298            311
   Portion of rentals representing an interest factor......................         84             90
                                                                                ------           ----
   Total fixed charges.....................................................        382            401
                                                                                ------           ----
Earnings Available for Fixed Charges.......................................     $1,190           $912
                                                                                ------           ----
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges (Note 6)................................        3.1            2.3
                                                                                ------           ----
</TABLE>
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 544 

To amend the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act to permanently extend the 

period of protections for servicemembers against mortgage foreclosures, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 8, 2011 

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

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act to permanently extend the period of protections for 

servicemembers against mortgage foreclosures, and for 

other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PERMANENT EXTENSION OF PERIOD OF PRO4 TECTIONS FOR SERVICEMEMBERS AGAINST 

5 MORTGAGE FORECLOSURES. 

6 (a) EXTENSION OF PROTECTION PERIOD.—Sub7 section (c) of section 303 of the Servicemembers Civil ReVerDate Mar 15 2010 02:57 Feb 10, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H544.IH H544

jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 544 IH

1 lief Act (50 U.S.C. App. 533) is amended by striking ‘‘90 

2 days’’ and inserting ‘‘9 months’’. 

3 (b) EXTENSION OF STAY OF PROCEEDINGS PE4 RIOD.—Subsection (b) of such section is amended by strik5 ing ‘‘90 days’’ and inserting ‘‘9 months’’. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
---

EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as created by Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Upstream
Biosciences Inc. (the Company) hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge,
that:

| | (1) | the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of the Company for the
      year ended September 30, 2008 (the Report) fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |     |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      
| | (2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.                                                                                                     

|Dated: February 2, 2009 | By: /s/ Joel Bellenson              
|----------------------- | ------------------------------------
|                        | Joel Bellenson                      
|                        | Chief Executive Officer and Director
|                        | (Principal Executive Officer)       

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Upstream
Biosciences Inc. and will be retained by Upstream Biosciences Inc. and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 of Atlas America Public #11-2002 Ltd. (the
"Partnership") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2003 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. 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 Partnership.


                                       /s/ Nancy J. McGurk
                                       ------------------------------
                                       Nancy J. McGurk
                                       Chief Financial Officer of the
                                       Managing General Partner
                                       March 29, 2004
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WACO DIVISION

WSOU INVESTMENTS LLC

vs.

MICROSOFT CORPORATION

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL NO:

WA:20-CV-00456-ADA

ORDER CANCELLING TELEPHONIC SCHEDULING

CONFERENCE

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above entitled and numbered case having been set

for TELEPHONIC SCHEDULING CONFERENCE on Friday, September 18, 2020 at

03:00 PM is hereby CANCELLED until further order of the court.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 17th day of September, 2020.

______________________________

ALAN D ALBRIGHT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 6:20-cv-00456-ADA Document 25 Filed 09/17/20 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR 

THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN DIVISION 

Socket Mobile, Inc., 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

KIOXIA, 

Defendant. 

Case No. 1:20-cv-00418-LY 

Patent Case 

Jury Trial Demanded 

UNOPPOSED MOTION TO STAY ALL DEADLINES AND 

NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT 

Plaintiff Socket Mobile, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) hereby notifies the Court that the parties have 

reached a settlement that will resolve all pending claims between them. The parties request up to 

and including November 5, 2020, to comply with their obligations under the agreement and submit 

dismissal papers. Accordingly, Plaintiff files this unopposed motion for a stay of all pending 

deadlines, up to and including November 5, 2020, so that the parties may take the necessary steps 

to comply with the parties’ settlement agreement and submit dismissal papers. This stay is not 

sought for the purpose of delay but so that justice may be served. 

Dated: October 2, 2020 Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Isaac Rabicoff 

Case 1:20-cv-00418-LY Document 21 Filed 10/02/20 Page 1 of 2
Isaac Rabicoff 

Rabicoff Law LLC 

73 W Monroe Street 

Chicago, IL 

(773) 669-4590 

isaac@rabilaw.com

Counsel for Plaintiff 

Socket Mobile, Inc. 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing document was served on all parties 

who have appeared in this case on October 2, 2020, via the Court's CM/ECF system. 

/s/ Isaac Rabicoff 

Isaac Rabicoff 

Case 1:20-cv-00418-LY Document 21 Filed 10/02/20 Page 2 of 2
#### HIDALGO DISTRIBUTING CO., *Inc. v.*SAFEWAY STORES, Inc.

No. 11730.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

July 16, 1947.

E. A. McDaniel, of McAllen, for appellant.

Greer, Cox & Patterson, of McAllen, for appellee.

MURRAY, Justice.

This suit was instituted by Safeway Stores, Inc., against Hidalgo Distributing Company, a private corporation, seeking to recover the sum of $338.15', alleged to have been paid to defendant by plaintiff through oversight or inadvertence. The sum was the amount of freight on two railroad box cars of pineapples shipped from Brownsville, Texas, to Dallas, Texas.

The trial was before the court without the intervention of a jury and resulted in judgment in plaintiff’s favor for the sunt of $338.15.

Hidalgo Distributing Company has prosecuted this appeal.

The controversy arose in this way: Appellant sold the two cars of pineapples, containing 770 dozen pineapples, to appel-lee at $5 per dozen and the freight was to be ultimately paid by appellant. Appellee contended that there was an agreement that it need not pay for any pineapples that were unsalable, and that there were 1141⁄2 dozen unsalable. Appellant denied that any such agreement was made.

Appellee paid the freight on the two cars, intending to deduct the amount thereof when it remitted for the purchase price of the pineapples, but forgot to do so. According to appellee, there were only 6551⁄2 dozen pineapples which were salable and at $5 per dozen the amount would be $3,277.50. A check for this amount was mailed to appellant and the matter of deducting the sum of $338.15 for the freight was overlooked. It is for this $338.15 that appellee recovered judgment. According to appellant’s contention there was no agreement that appellee need not pay for unsalable pineapples and that the purchase price was 770 dozen at $5 per dozen, amounting to $3,850, from which the freight could properly be deducted, leaving the amount due $3,511.85, which was $234.35 more than the amount of the check sent in payment of the two cars of pineapples.

Appellant contends that there was a variance between the contract pleaded and the one proved as to the right not to pay for unsalable pineapples. We have examined the pleadings and deem them sufficient to plead the contract which was proved, but if there was a defect of pleading it is taken care of by the provisions of Rule 67, Texas Rules Civil Procedure; Bednarz v. State, 142 Tex. 138, 176 S.W.2d 562.

*524Appellant further contends that the proof was insufficient to sustain the implied finding of the trial court that 1143/2 dozen of the pineapples were unsalable, We have examined the evidence and find it sufficient to sustain this implied finding, The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.