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

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2699 

To extend the hold harmless provisions of the Ryan White HIV/AIDS 

Program pending reauthorization of the overall program. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 16, 2013 

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

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To extend the hold harmless provisions of the Ryan White 

HIV/AIDS Program pending reauthorization of the overall program. 

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

3 SECTION 1. RYAN WHITE HIV/AIDS PROGRAM TECHNICAL 

4 AMENDMENTS. 

5 For any fiscal year after fiscal year 2013 for which 

6 appropriations are made to carry out title XXVI of the 

7 Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300ff–11 et seq.) 

8 but for which the authorizations of appropriations to carry 

9 out such title have not been extended— 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 2699 IH

1 (1) sections 2603(a)(4)(C) and 

2 2618(a)(2)(H)(v) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 300ff– 

3 13(a)(4)(C), 300ff–28(a)(2)(H)(v)) shall not apply; 

4 and 

5 (2) sections 2603(a)(4)(A), 2610(c)(2)(B)(ii), 

6 and 2618(a)(2)(H)(iii) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 

7 300ff–13(a)(4)(A), 300ff–20(c)(2)(B)(ii), 300ff– 

8 28(a)(2)(H)(iii)) shall apply in the same manner as 

9 such respective sections apply for fiscal year 2013. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION
EXTRACTED FROM THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-K DATED
DECEMBER 27, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>

<CIK> 0000094673
<NAME> STORAGE TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

       
<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                        DEC-27-1996
<PERIOD-END>                             DEC-27-1996
<CASH>                                       388,401
<SECURITIES>                                  29,176
<RECEIVABLES>                                567,066
<ALLOWANCES>                                  12,907
<INVENTORY>                                  288,615
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           1,260,351
<PP&E>                                       829,122
<DEPRECIATION>                               501,588
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             1,884,276
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        536,180
<BONDS>                                      150,806
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        0
<COMMON>                                      11,636
<OTHER-SE>                                 1,169,347
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               1,884,276
<SALES>                                    1,478,685
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           2,039,550
<CGS>                                        897,548
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              1,192,777
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             176,422
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            26,122
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              226,692
<INCOME-TAX>                                  55,900
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          170,792
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                9,535
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                 180,327
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   1.61
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   1.50

        

</TABLE>
Docket Number FAA-2013-0980
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 quarterly report of Cytation Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10QSB for the period ending June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Richard A. Fisher, Chairman of the Board 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.



/s/Richard Fisher                      Richard Fisher
Chairman Acting Chief Financial Officer
August 19, 2004
EXHIBIT 31.1CERTIFICATIONI, John J. Hayes, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify that:I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Sunair Electronics, Inc.;1. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;2. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in thereport, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations andcash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;3. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) forthe registrant and have:(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.   DATE: August 15, 2005     /s/ John J. Hayes John J. Hayes
ERNST & YOUNG
Ernst & Young LLP

1300 Huntington Building
925 Euclid Avenue
Cleveland, Ohio 44115-1405

Report on Management's Assertion on Compliance with
Minimum Servicing Standards Set Forth in the
Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers
Report of Independent Accountants

Board of Directors
National City Mortgage Co.

We have examined management's assertion, included in the
accompanying Report of Management, that National City Mortgage
Co. (NCM) complied with the minimum servicing standards set forth
in the Mortgage Bankers Association of America's Uniform Single
Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers (USAP) for the year
ended December 31, 2002. Management is responsible for NCM's
compliance with those requirements. Our responsibility is to
express an opinion on management's assertions about NCM's
compliance based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation
standards established by the American: Institute of Certified
Public Accountants and, accordingly, included examining, on a
test basis, evidence about NCM's compliance with those
requirements and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our
examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our
examination does not provide a legal determination on NCM's
compliance with specified requirements.

In our opinion, management's assertion, that NCM complied with
the aforementioned requirements for the year ended December 31,
2002, is fairly stated, in all material respects.
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the
audit committee, management, Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Corporation, Federal National Mortgage Association, Government
National Mortgage Association and NCM's private investors and is
not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than
these specified parties.

February 24, 2003
Ernst & Young LLP
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.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on July 24, 2000, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), Catalytica Advanced Technologies has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing (1) the identities of the parties and (2) the nature and objectives of the venture. The notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act, the identities of the parties are Catalytica Advanced Technologies, Inc., Mountain View, CA; and Argonaut Technologies, Inc., San Carlos, CA. The nature and objectives of the venture are to conduct research on the discovery and development of emission control catalysts for lean burn engines using a novel, rapid Catalyst Development Engine. The activities of this Joint Venture project will be partially funded by an award from the Advanced Technology Program, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of Commerce.                

Constance K. Robinson,

Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 00-25898  Filed 10-6-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
### M A N D A T E

TO THE 357TH DISTRIC T COURT of CAMERON COUNTY, GREE TINGS:

Before our Court of Appeals for the Thirteenth District of Texas, on the 17th day of July, 2014, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

Juan Antonio Coronado, Fr ancisco Soliz Ramirez, Roberto Rivera III, Ruben Contreras, Appellant s

,

v.

Peter Zavaletta Appellee.

CAUSE NO. 13

- 14

- 00335

- CV (Tr.Ct.No. 2008

- 03

- 1636

- E)

was determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

JUDGMENT

THE TH IRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion. Costs of the appeal are adjudged against

appellants.

We further order this decision certified below for observance

July 17, 2014.



WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals for the Thirteenth District of Texas, in this behalf, and in all things have it duly recognized, obeyed and executed.

WITNESS, the Hon. Rogelio Valdez, Chief Justice of ou r Court of Appeals, with the seal thereof affixed, at the City of Edinburg, Texas this 29th day of January, 2015.

Dorian E. Ramirez, CLERK
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.                  

###### Department of Transportation

###### Federal Aviation Administration

          - 14 CFR Part 71
          - [Airspace Docket No. 00-ACE-21]

# AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

# ACTION:

Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date.

# SUMMARY:

This document confirms the effective date of a direct final rule which revises Class E airspace at Columbia, MO.

# DATES:

The direct final rule published at 65 FR 43686 is effective on 0901 UTC, November 30, 2000.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Brenda Mumper, Air Traffic Division, Airspace Branch, ACE-520A, DOT Regional Headquarters Building, Federal Aviation Administration, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106; telephone: (816) 329-2524.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The FAA published this direct final rule with a request for comments in the                     **Federal Register**                     on July 14, 2000 (65 FR 43686). The FAA uses the direct final rulemaking procedure for a non-controversial rule where the FAA believes that there will be no adverse public comment. This direct final rule advised the public that no adverse comments were anticipated, and that unless a written adverse comment, or a written notice of intent to submit such an adverse comment, were received within the comment period, the regulation would become effective on November 30, 2000. No adverse comments were received, and thus this document confirms that this direct final rule will become effective on that date.                

Issued in Kansas City, MO on September 28, 2000.

Herman J. Lyons, Jr.,

Manager, Air Traffic Division, Central Region.

[FR Doc. 00-26526  Filed 10-13-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
#### BUTLER v. STATE.

No. 22851.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 10, 1944.

Joe Burkett and Schlesinger, Goodstein & McGuire, all of San Antonio, for appellant.

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

KRUEGER, Judge.

The conviction is for the offense of murder. The punishment assessed is confinement in the state penitentiary for a period of five years.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception. The indictment and all matters of procedure appear to be in regular form.

The judgment is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
### AD Economic Evaluation

Docket No . FAA - 2015 - 1008 Directorate ID : 2013 - SW - 064 - AD Helicopter Model: Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Model 269A, 269A - 1, 269B, 269C, 269C - 1, 269D, and TH - 55A Helicopters Number of Helicopters (U.S. Operators): 1,085 Helicopters in the US Registry . Reason : The actions of this AD are intended to detect and prevent excessive wear of the splined coupling, which could lead to failure of the tail rotor (T/R) driveshaft and subsequent loss of control o f the helicopter. Costs : Parts per Helicopter $14,853 to replace the T/R driving spline and driveshaft $14,836 to replace a T/R driven spline and driveshaft $5 to replace a grease fitting Labor per Helicopter ( 1.8 work - hour x $ 8 5 /work - hour for the insp ection and lubrication of the T/R driveshaft splined fittings ) (0.25 work - hour x $85/work hour for the inspection of the grease fittings) (1.8 work - hour x $85/work - hour for the inspection of the driveshaft, fittings, internal stops, and drive spines ) (1.6 work - hour x $85/work - hour to replace the T/R driving spline and driveshaft) (1.5 work - hour x $85/work - hour to replace a T/R driven spline and driveshaft) (0.25 work - hour x $85/work hour to replace a grease fitting ) $ 153

$21 $153 per inspection cycl e $136 $128 $21 Total Cost per Helicopter $153 for the inspection and lubrication of the T/R driveshaft splined fittings $21 for the inspection of the grease fittings $153 for the inspection of the driveshaft, fittings, internal stops, and drive sp ines (per inspection cycle) $14,989 to replace the T/R driving spline and driveshaft $14,964 to replace a T/R driven spline and driveshaft $26 to replace a grease fitting2

Total US Fleet Cost $166,005 for the inspection and lubrication of the T/R drivesha ft splined fittings $22,785 for the inspection of the grease fittings $166,005 for the inspection of the driveshaft, fittings, internal stops, and drive spines (per inspection cycle) 

### Executive Order 12866 : Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action?” Yes ( ) No (  ) DOT Regulatory

Policies and Procedures : Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No (  ) Regulatory

Flexibility

Act : Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Yes ( ) No (  ) Project Engineer : Stephen Kowalski
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, F. F. Falls, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Community First Financial Corporation.

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such
statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The small business issuers other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuers
disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusion about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business
issuers most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuers fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal
control over financial reporting; and

5. The small business issuers other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuers auditors and the audit committee of small business issuers board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
affect the small business issuers ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material,
that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting.



|                     |  |                
|-------------------- |  | ---------------
|Date: March 27, 2006 |  | /s/ F. F. Falls
|                     |  | F. F. Falls    
|                     |  | President