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

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5578 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Basic Yellow 40 chloride 

based. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 8, 2012 

Mr. CLAY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Basic Yellow 

40 chloride based. 

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

3 SECTION 1. BASIC YELLOW 40 CHLORIDE BASED. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.25.04 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 Basic Yellow 40 chloride based) is amended by striking 

7 the date in the effective period column and inserting ‘‘12/ 

8 31/2015’’. 

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

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


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5578 IH

1 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

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

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### CANTU v. STATE.

No. 24468.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 23, 1949.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 4, 1950.

None on appeal for appellant.

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

DAVIDSON, Judge.

The offense is assault with intent to murder, with punishment assessed at fifteen years in the penitentiary by reason of a prior conviction for assault with intent to murder, as provided by Art. 62, P.C.

Avila, the injured party, a deputy sheriff, was called to the town of La-Villa, in Hidalgo County, to investigate a disturbance there by a man reported to be “shooting up the town.” Upon the deputy sheriff’s arrival, the man was identified as the appellant. With the assistance of other peace officers, appellant, armed with a pistol, was apprehended on a public highway. Avila ordered him to drop the gun as he was arresting him. Thereupon, appellant opened fire upon Avila, none of the three shots fired taking effect. Avila then shot the appellant.

Testifying in his own behalf, appellant said that, due to the drinking of “Ha-bañera” some time before he knew nothing about what happened. He denied any enmity or ill-will toward Avila or any intent to kill him.

The facts abundantly support the verdict.

Appellant contends that the prior conviction relied upon to enhance the punishment was that of assault with intent to murder without malice, and was not an offense of the same nature as that of assault with intent to murder with malice.

*425Assault to murder without malice is, none the less, an assault with intent to murder; malice, or the absence of malice, in the commission of such offense, affects only the punishment.

Other matters appearing in the record cannot be considered, in the absence of bills of exception.

The judgment is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the Court.

On Appellant’s Motion for Rehearing

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Motion for rehearing in this case raises no question other than that discussed in the original opinion. The motion was presented by able oral argument. We have given consideration to this and have carefully reviewed the record. It appears that the original opinion disposed of all issues properly and that further discussion of the same would not be helpful.

Appellant’s motion for rehearing is overruled.
Case 6:20-cv-00507-ADA Document 8 Filed 03/24/20 Page 1 of 2
Case 6:20-cv-00507-ADA Document 8 Filed 03/24/20 Page 2 of 2
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 Trade Commission

# For Further Information Contact:

Sandra M. Peay or Parcellena P. Fielding, Contact Representatives, Federal Trade Commission Premerger Notification Office, Bureau of Competition, Room 303, Washington, DC 20580; (202) 326-3100.

By Direction of the Commission.

Donald S. Clark,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-26343 Filed 10-12-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6750-01-M
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 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 on Form 10-Q of Enesco Group, Inc. (the
Company) for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, George
R. Ditomassi, the Interim Chief Executive 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 the
operations of the Company. November 8, 2004
    
    By: /s/ George R. DitomassiInterim Chief Executive Officer
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2 Certification by the Principal Financial Officer of
Enesco Group, Inc.
Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) under the Exchange Act and
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) I, Paula E. Manley, am Chief Financial Officer of Enesco Group, Inc. (the Company). This certification is being furnished pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) under the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act) and 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in connection with the filing of the Companys Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q, for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2005 (the Report). I hereby certify that to the best of my knowledge: (a) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78 m(a) or 78o(d)); and (b) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company. May 10, 2005
    
    /s/ Paula E. ManleyPaula E. ManleyChief Financial Officer
 39
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (FormS-3 No. 333-140840) of Newcastle Investment Corp. and in the related Prospectus of our reports dated March 13, 2009, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Newcastle Investment Corp., and the effectiveness of internalcontrol over financial reporting of Newcastle Investment Corp., included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2008. 

/s/Ernst & Young LLP 

New York, New York 

March 13,2009
#### JONES v. STATE.

No. 23649.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 7, 1947.

No appearance for appellant.

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

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was sentenced, upon a jury verdict, to ten years in the penitentiary on a charge of rape. The indictment contained *831several counts and the jury’s verdict of guilt was based on the second, which charged carnal knowledge of a female not the wife of accused who was under the age of eighteen years.

The record is before us without bills of exception. No brief has been filed in the case by appellant and we are not advised of the claim for reversal. The evidence is amply sufficient to sustain the conviction in that direct proof was made of all the elements of the offense charged.

The appellant, a married man, went out for a night of revelry with a party of six other boys and girls crowded into a two-door two-seated car, of which he was the, driver. One of the party, a married woman, testified that she had been dating appellant and expected this occasion to be a date with him. For some reason he took a notion, however, to a young girl-in the car who was only fifteen years of age. After they had visited an eating place, had drank both beer and whisky to the extent that the above-quoted witness, the only one who testified in his behalf, said she had become under the influence of liquor but believed that she had not passed out, they then drove into the country and over a side road a few miles where they stopped and the offense is alleged to have occurred.

The appellant announced his purpose to get in the pants of this young girl and, after getting the best of a fight in which one of the boys attempted to take the part of the prosecuting witness, appellant forced his victim into a field, carrying with him a blanket. All of this was testified to by other parties in the car. In a few minutes they returned to the car and to Amarillo where, at a late hour of the night, the parties separated. Early the next morning the prosecu-trix went to her father, who lived on a ranch, and during the day they went to the sheriff’s office. Following an investigation by the sheriff and district attorney, she was, on the next day, carried to the county physician who examined her private parts and whose testimony fully and completely corroborates the story told by the prosecutrix.

The only weakness we find in her testimony is her statement that he did not penetrate her. That was a legal 'conclusion. She then described what took place and this description is sufficient, legally, to establish penetration. The testimony of the doctor is positive that she had been penetrated some seventy-two hours prior to his examination. Coupled with the declarations of the accused, we do not see how there could be any doubt as to the sufficiency of the evidence. Appellant did not testify and none of the evidence on this point is contradicted by any witness. We think the jury was fully supported in its conclusion of guilt.

Finding no reversible error, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


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 The Stephan Co. (the
"Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2006
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I, Frank F. Ferola, Chief Executive
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, to my knowledge:

(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/ Frank F. Ferola
__________________________________
Frank F. Ferola
Chief Executive Officer
November 13, 2006
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5700 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5700

   To suspend temporarily the duty on certain cotton yarn of combed 
                                fibers.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 9, 2012

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To suspend temporarily the duty on certain cotton yarn of combed 
                                fibers.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN COTTON YARN OF COMBED FIBERS.

    (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        Cotton yarn (other  Free            No change      No change      On or before     ''.
                          than sewing                                                       12/31/2015
                          thread),
                          containing 85
                          percent or more
                          by weight of
                          cotton, not put
                          up for retail
                          sale, consisting
                          of multiple
                          (folded) or
                          cabled yarn, of
                          combed fibers
                          gassed and
                          mercerized,
                          measuring per
                          single yarn less
                          than 125 decitex
                          but not less than
                          106.38 decitex
                          (exceeding 80
                          metric number but
                          not exceeding 94
                          metric number)
                          (provided for in
                          subheading
                          5205.46.00)......

    (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>
```
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 198 (Thursday, October 12, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 60657]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-26123]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. GT01-1-000]


Distrigas of Massachusetts LLC.; Notice of Proposed Changes in 
FERC Gas Tariff

October 5, 2000.
    Take notice that on October 2, 2000, Distrigas of Massachusetts LLC 
(DOMAC), formerly Distrigas of Massachusetts Corporation, tendered for 
filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, the 
following tariff sheet, to become effective December 1, 2000:

Ninth Revised Sheet No. 94

    DOMAC states that the purpose of this filing is to record 
semiannual changes in DOMAC's index of customers.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in 
accordance with section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-26123 Filed 10-11-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
-,,-

DUANE R. OLSON, 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Plaintiff, 

FILED 

APR - 6 2J10 

Clerk, u.s. District & Bankruptcy Courts for the District of Columbia 

v. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Civil Action No. 10 0556 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Defendant. 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

This matter is before the Court on petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus and 

application to proceed in forma pauperis. 

Plaintiff is a federal prisoner who currently is serving a sentence of 324 months' 

imprisonment. Compi. at 2; see id., Attach. (Judgment in a Criminal Case, Case No. 90 CR 

577 -1). Generally, plaintiff alleges that the sentencing court lacked jurisdiction over the 

criminal case against him for violations of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and 

Control Act of 1970, see 21 U.S.c. § 801 et seq., see generally CompI., rendering his 

conviction, sentence, and subsequent incarceration invalid. It appears, then, that plaintiff is 

seeking to vacate or set aside his sentence. 

A claim of this nature must be presented to the sentencing court in a motion under 28 

U.S.C. § 2255. See Ojo v. Immigration & Naturalization Serv.,106 F.3d 680,683 (5th Cir. 

1997) (sentencing court is the only court with jurisdiction to hear the defendant's complaint 

regarding errors that occurred before or during sentencing). Challenges to the jurisdiction of 

the federal court imposing sentence and attacks on the constitutionality of a federal prisoner's 

1 
conviction can both be raised in a motion under Section 2255. See Taylor v. United States 

Board of Parole, 194 F.2d 882, 883 (D.C. Cir. 1952). Section 2255 provides specifically that: 

[a] prisoner in custody under sentence of a court established by Act 

of Congress claiming the right to be released upon the ground that 

the sentence was imposedjn violation of the Constitution or laws of 

the United States, or that the court was without jurisdiction to 

impose such sentence, or that the sentence was in excess of the 

maximum authorized by law, or is otherwise subject to collateral 

attack, may move the court which imposed the sentence to vacate, 

set aside or correct the sentence. 

28 U.S.c. § 2255 (emphasis added). Moreover, the ability to challenge a conviction by a 

motion to vacate sentence generally precludes a challenge by a petition for habeas corpus: 

[a]n application for a writ of habeas corpus in behalf of a prisoner 

who is authorized to apply for relief by motion pursuant to [28 

U.S.C. § 2255], shall not be entertained if it appears that the 

applicant has failed to apply for relief, by motion, to the court 

which sentenced him, or that such court has denied him relief, 

unless it also appears that the remedy by motion is inadequate or 

ineffective to test the legality of his detention. 

28 U.S.c. § 2255 (emphasis added). 

The Court therefore will dismiss the petition without prejudice. An Order consistent 

with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately on this same date. 

Date: \1 t.~' t ~ 

United States District Judge 

2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WACOACO DIVISION

WSOU INVESTMENTS LLC

vs.

§

§

§

§

NO: WA:20-CV-00492-ADA

ZTE CORPORATION, ZTE (USA), INC., §

ZTE (TX), INC.

Defendant

ORDER SETTING Discovery DISCOVERY HEARING

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

DISCOVERY HEARING, in U.S. Magistrate Court, Courtroom No. 2, Third Floor, 800 Franklin

Avenue, Waco,aco Texas, on November 01, 2022 at 01:30 PM.

28th day of October, 2022.

Derek T. Gilliland

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 6:20-cv-00492-ADA-DTG Document 237 Filed 10/28/22 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 32



CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORT (SECTION 906
CERTIFICATION)



Richard S. Cupp and Hwa Kyung
Kim hereby certify as follows:



1. They are the
Principal Executive Officer and the Principal Financial Officer, respectively, of Center Financial Corporation.



2. The Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A of Center Financial Corporation for the year ended December 31, 2009 complies with the
requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and the information contained in the report on Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of Center Financial Corporation.



|                      |  |     |  |                                                                    
|--------------------- |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: April 29, 2011 |  | By: |  | /s/ Richard S. Cupp                                                
|                      |  |     |  | Richard S. Cupp                                                    
|                      |  |     |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
|                      |  |    
|Dated: April 29, 2011 |  | By: |  | /s/ Hwa Kyung Kim                                                  
|                      |  |     |  | Hwa Kyung Kim                                                      
|                      |  |     |  | Vice President and Controller
(Principal Financial Officer)
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT
D.T., ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D17-155 ) J.M., ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed February 14, 2018. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk County; Catherine L. Combee, Judge. Michael M. Brownlee of The Brownlee Law Firm, P.A., Orlando, for Appellant. Sara M. McKinley of McKinley Law Firm, P.A., Bartow, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

D.T., the father, challenges the final judgment of paternity. Although an Interim Order Pending Final Hearing dated July 19, 2016, included a child support guidelines worksheet as an attachment, no such worksheet was attached to the final judgment. And the child support calculations in the final judgment differ from those in- 2 -

the worksheet attached to the interim order without sufficient explanation in the record. See Dep't of Revenue ex rel. R.S.M. v. B.J.M., 127 So. 3d 859, 861 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013). We therefore reverse and remand for recalculation of child support. The final judgment of paternity is affirmed in all other respects.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

KELLY, BLACK, and SALARIO, JJ., Concur.