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

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1390

To award a congressional gold medal to Lou Rawls.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 17, 1993

Mr. WAXMAN (for himself and Mrs. COLLINS of Illinois) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Banking, Finance and

Urban Affairs

A BILL

To award a congressional gold medal to Lou Rawls.

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

3 SECTION 1. FINDINGS.

4 The Congress finds that—

5 (1) Lou Rawls is a stellar entertainer and com6 mitted humanitarian;

7 (2) Lou Rawls is unsurpassed in his work to

8 advance the cause of educational opportunities for

9 African Americans;

10 (3) Lou Rawls organizes and hosts the annual

11 ‘‘Lou Rawls Parade of Stars’’ telethon for the Unit-
2

•HR 1390 IH

1 ed Negro College Fund which has raised more than

2 $10,000,000 for such Fund and provides approxi3 mately 20 percent of the annual revenues of the

4 Fund; and

5 (4) since the United Negro College Fund bene6 fits more than 50,000 students attending historically

7 black colleges, the tireless efforts of Lou Rawls have

8 helped thousands of young people to realize their

9 educational dreams.

10 SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL GOLD MEDAL.

11 (a) PRESENTATION AUTHORIZED.—The President is

12 authorized to present, on behalf of the Congress, to Lou

13 Rawls, a gold medal of appropriate design, in recognition

14 of his work on behalf of educational opportunities for Afri15 can Americans.

16 (b) DESIGN AND STRIKING.—For purposes of the

17 presentation referred to in subsection (a), the Secretary

18 of the Treasury shall strike a gold medal with suitable em19 blems, devices, and inscriptions to be determined by the

20 Secretary.

21 (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATION.—There are

22 authorized to be appropriated not to exceed $20,000 to

23 carry out this section.
3

•HR 1390 IH

1 SEC. 3. DUPLICATE MEDALS.

2 (a) STRIKING AND SALE.—The Secretary of the

3 Treasury may strike and sell duplicates in bronze of the

4 gold medal struck pursuant to section 2 under such regu5 lations as the Secretary may prescribe, at a price sufficient

6 to cover the cost of such duplicates, including labor, mate7 rials, dies, use of machinery, and overhead expenses, and

8 the cost of the gold medal.

9 (b) REIMBURSEMENT OF APPROPRIATION.—The ap10 propriation used to carry out section 2 shall be reimbursed

11 out of the proceeds of sales under subsection (a).

12 SEC. 4. NATIONAL MEDALS.

13 The medals struck pursuant to this Act are national

14 medals for purposes of chapter 51 of title 31, United

15 States Code.

Æ
#### In the Matter of Ida Thomas, Appellant. Sylvester K. Thomas, as Proposed Conservatee, Respondent.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Hansel McGee, J.), entered June 20, 1989, which, *inter alia,*directed appellant to pay $1,500 in attorney’s fees, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, so as to vacate the twelfth decretal paragraph, and award Emil M. Sanchez, Esq., the sum of $5,000 as and for services rendered, together with disbursements in the amount of $150, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

We believe that in view of the services rendered by the attorney for the conservator, his fee should be increased to the extent indicated. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Kupferman, Sullivan, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1385 Reported in House (RH)]

                                                 Union Calendar No. 136

103d CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 1385

                          [Report No. 103-245]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

  To amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to 
  allow formula grants to be used to prosecute persons driving while 
                              intoxicated.

_______________________________________________________________________

                           September 21, 1993

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 
                       and ordered to be printed

                                                 Union Calendar No. 136
103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1385

                          [Report No. 103-245]

  To amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to 
  allow formula grants to be used to prosecute persons driving while 
                              intoxicated.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 17, 1993

  Mr. Schiff introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

                           September 21, 1993

 Additional sponsors: Mr. Zimmer, Mrs. Lloyd, Mr. Ramstad, Mr. Skeen, 
                              and Mr. Fish

                           September 21, 1993

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 
                       and ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to 
  allow formula grants to be used to prosecute persons driving while 
                              intoxicated.

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

SECTION 1. GRANT PROGRAM DESCRIPTION.

    Section 501(b) of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe 
Streets Act of 1968 is amended--
            (1) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (21) and 
        adding ``; and''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(22) programs for the prosecution of driving while 
        intoxicated and the enforcement of other laws relating to 
        alcohol use and the operation of motor vehicles.''.
```
# IK-IS ELECTRONIC RECORD
COA# 02-14-00043-CR OFFENSE: 22.011 Johnathan Lewis Helm v. The State 

## STYLE: ofTexas COUNTY: Tarrant COA DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED TRIAL COURT: Criminal District Court No. 4 

### DATE: 06/04/15 Publish: NO TC CASE #: 1276053D



### IN THE COURTOF CRIMINALAPPEALS Johnathan Lewis Helm v. Tl STYLE: ofTexas he State 

### Petition 

# cca# 79amtS appellant's CCA Disposition: FORDISCRETIONARYREVIEW IN CCA IS: DATE: 

# ^&Fl^&J> JUDGE: 

# DATE: OHl/^/j-O/SJUDGE: 1/jA (JaA^L^ SIGNED: PC: PUBLISH: DNP:
MOTION FOR REHEARING IN CCA IS: JUDGE: 

### ELECTRONIC RECORD
US Oncology, Inc.



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 of US Oncology, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
I, R. Dale Ross, 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 result of operations of the Company.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                         |  |  | 
|------------------------ |  |  | 
|Date: November 13, 2003: |  |  | 
|                         |  |  | 
|                         |  |  |
**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

 

 

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002(subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of Title 18, UnitedStates Code), the undersigned officer of NeoPharm, Inc., a Delaware corporation(the “Company”), does hereby certify with respect to the Quarterly Report ofthe Company on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2004 as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “10-Q Report”) that:

 

(1)                                  the 10-Q Report fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                  the informationcontained in the 10-Q Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Dated:  May 10, 2004 | /s/ James M. Hussey     |   |
|---------------------------|-------------------------|--------|
|                      | James M. Hussey,        |
|                      | Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
**Exhibit 31.3** **Certification    of Chief Accounting Officer**     I, Sherry Keenan, Chief Accounting Officer of SBM Certificate    Company, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on    Form 10-K    of SBM Certificate Company;     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 registrant as of,    and for, the periods presented in this report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer 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 registrant 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 registrant, including its consolidated    subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those    entities, particularly during the period in which this report is    being prepared;     b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s    disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report    our conclusions 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    registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that    occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter    (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an    annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably    likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal    control over financial reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I    have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal    control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s    auditors and the audit committee 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 internal control over financial    reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the    registrant’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    registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.      /s/  Sherry Keenan
exv10w3



 






Exhibit 10.3




ADDENDUM NO. 1

TO

MONEY TRANSFER AGREEMENT




	 	 	 
	DATE:

	 	October 31, 2003
	 
	 	 
	PARTIES:

	 	Travelers Express Company, Inc. (“Company”)
	 
	 	 
	

	 	and
	 
	 	 
	

	 	ACE Cash Express, Inc. (“ACE”)






RECITALS:





	 	A.  	Company and ACE are parties to that certain Money Transfer Agreement dated June
30, 2000, including all Exhibits thereto and amendments (the “Agreement”).
	 
	 	B.  	The Parties now wish to add an Addendum to the Agreement.





AGREEMENT:




In consideration of the following terms and conditions, the receipt of which is acknowledged, the
Parties agree to amend the Agreement as follows:




	I.  	Signage.
	 
	   	Company will provide Ace with neon signs of a design approved by Company (“Neons”). ACE
agrees that it will install and maintain one (1) Neon in a prominent place at each of its
Locations, subject to approval of list of Locations by Company and ACE. Company understands
that a Neon might not be installed at every Location due to limited space, aesthetics or
lease restrictions. ACE shall, whenever possible, place Neons in the front windows of its
Locations, but at all times has sole discretion regarding the placement of the Neon.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event that laws, regulations, or contractual
restrictions prohibit ACE from installing and maintaining a Neon at a particular Location,
ACE will not be considered in violation of this signage provision. Company will pay the
costs for the Neons and installation costs, including, but not limited to, wiring or
additional hardware or labor required for installation. Company will not provide any other
compensation to ACE with respect to Neons.
	 
	II.  	Interpretation of Addendum.
	 
	   	In the event of any conflict between the Agreement and this Addendum, the terms of this
Addendum shall control. Except as expressly amended, supplemented or modified by this
Addendum, the Agreement as heretofore in effect shall continue in full force and




1









 












	  	effect. All capitalized terms contained in this Addendum, unless specifically defined
herein, shall have the respective meanings ascribed to them in the Agreement. The
provisions of Section 24 of the Agreement shall also apply to this Addendum.
	 
	III.  	Binding Effect.
	 
	   	This Addendum shall bind and insure to the benefit of the Parties and their respective
successors and assigns, permitted by Paragraph 23 of the Agreement.





IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Addendum to be effective as of the “Date” first
set forth above.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	ACE CASH EXPRESS, INC.	 	TRAVELERS EXPRESS COMPANY, INC.
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:

	 	/s/ MICHAEL J. BRISKEY
	 	By:
	 	/s/ ANTHONY P. RYAN
	

	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Print Name: Michael J. Briskey	 	Print Name: Anthony P. Ryan
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Title: Vice President Finance	 	Title: VP/GM
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Date: October 31, 2003	 	Date: November 10, 2003







2
#### WEST v. STATE.

No. 20584.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 11, 1939.

M. L. Bennett, of Normangee, for appellant.

*123Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

HAWKINS, Judge.

Conviction is for cattle theft, punishment assessed being two years in the penitentiary.

The indictment properly charges the offense. The record is before this court without statement of facts or bills of exception, in which condition nothing is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.
#### CUDE v. STATE.

No. 21303.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 23, 1940.

B. F. Patterson, of San Antonio, for appellant.

*942Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s .Atty., of Austin, for the' State.

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was convicted of misdemean- or theft, punishment assessed being a fin' of ten dollars and confinement in the coun ty jail for ten days.

No statement of facts or bills of excep tion are brought forward. Nothing is pre sented for review.

The judgment is affirmed;
#### WEST et ux. v. CULPEPPER et al.

No. 2243—7368.

Commission of Appeals of Texas, Section A.

May 22, 1940.

Lewright, Lewright & Young, of San Antonio, for plaintiffs in error.

Perkins & Floyd, of Alice, for defendants in error.

GERMAN, Commissioner.

On July 1, 1937, plaintiffs in error, Buck S. West and Tommie Scott West, filed this suit in the District Court of Live Oak County against W. G. Culpepper and J. F. Stewart, as defendants. The parties will be designated as in the trial court.

Plaintiffs asked for temporary injunction, 'and as final relief prayed that the temporary injunction be made permanent. The basis of the prayer for injunction was that plaintiffs were in possession of certain lands aggregating about 2,300 acres; that they had for a number of years been in actual and peaceable possession of said lands; that defendants had wrongfully entered upon said lands and were attempting to construct certain fences thereon and around certain portions thereof; that the construction of said fences, if permitted, would interfere with plaintiffs’ possession and would prevent the grazing of their cattle on said lands, and would deprive them of the benefit of water for their cattle.

A temporary injunction was granted in favor of plaintiffs. On appeal, the Court of Civil Appeals, on November 3, 1937, dissolved this injunction. 110 S.W.2d 231. Although writ of error was granted, plaintiffs at no time requested the Supreme Court to grant temporary injunction, and have in no manner indicated that a restraining order was necessary.

After the submission of this case here, a suggestion was made that the cause was moot. In response to request by the Supreme Court the Honorable W. G. Gayle. Judge of the District Court of Live Oak County, held a hearing and made report to the Supreme Court with reference *167to the conditions now prevailing as regards the subject matter of this suit. From this report it clearly appears that if any controversy exists between the parties it involves purely a claim of title to land, and does not pertain to interference with possession of plaintiffs.

We are of the opinion that it would be wholly useless to now determine whether or not the trial court was justified in issuing temporary injunction, as was done, and therefore the cause as pending here is moot. Besides, it is reasonable to presume that plaintiffs are now ready for a speedy hearing upon the merits of their action, if they desire to further prosecute same.

This cause is, therefore, in so far as it involves temporary injunction, dismissed at the cost of plaintiffs in error, and the cause would stand upon the docket of the district court for further hearing upon the merits of the case.

Opinion adopted by the Supreme Court.
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED
PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors and
Shareholders of Advanced Photonix, Inc.Ann Arbor, Michigan

We hereby consent to the incorporation
by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (No. 333-120317, No.
333-128706, No. 333-132976 and No. 333-147802) and Form S-8 (No. 333-08972, No.
333-95301, No. 333-57068, No. 333-124708 and No. 333-147012) of Advanced
Photonix, Inc. of our report dated June 26, 2009 relating to the consolidated
financial statements and schedule for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2009 which
appears in this Form 10-K.



/s/ BDO Seidman, LLPTroy, MichiganJune 26,
2009

---
#### Nat ROGAN, Collector of Internal Revenue for the Sixth Collection District of California, Appellant, v. MODE O’DAY CORPORATION, a Corporation, Appellee.

No. 9611.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Aug. 26, 1940.

Wm. Fleet Palmer, U. S. Atty., E. H. Mitchell and Armond Monroe Jewell, Asst. U. S. Attys., all of Los Angeles, Calif., for appellant.

Miller, Chevalier, Peeler & Wilson, by Melvin D. Wilson, of Los Angeles, Calif., for appellee.

Before WILBUR, DENMAN, and MATHEWS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

On stipulation of counsel for respective parties, and good cause therefor appearing, ordered appeal herein, D.C., 32 F.Supp. 571, dismissed, that a judgment of dismissal be filed and entered accordingly, and mandate of this court in this cause issue forthwith.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 244 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 244

        Designating September 6, 1993, as ``Try American Day''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 29, 1993

 Mr. Cox introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred 
        to the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
        Designating September 6, 1993, as ``Try American Day''.

Whereas the creativity and ingenuity of American working men and women in the 
        United States have provided a host of new products and services which 
        improve the quality of life in the United States and the world;
Whereas American workers should be recognized as one of our Nation's most 
        valuable resources;
Whereas the American spirit of entrepreneurship, pride of craftsmanship, and 
        commitment to quality are hallmarks recognized throughout the world;
Whereas the United States and its citizens have reason to celebrate the strength 
        and quality of American products and services;
Whereas the quality and abundance of American goods are a tribute to the 
        productivity and ability of American workers;
Whereas the ability of American companies to export, even in the face of strong 
        trade barriers in many countries, is a sign of the true competitiveness 
        of American products;
Whereas American farmers and ranchers provide this country and the world with a 
        wide array of high quality food and fiber products and consistently 
        create annual agricultural trade surpluses of more than $20,000,000,000;
Whereas the energy and perseverance of American business serves as a beacon for 
        other nations that strive to ensure prosperity for their people; and
Whereas American small business provides a basis for economic progress and for 
        the creation of jobs and opportunities for people from every corner of 
        America: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That September 6, 1993, Labor 
Day, is designated as ``Try American Day''. The President is authorized 
and requested to issue a proclamation calling on the people of the 
United States to observe the day with appropriate ceremonies and 
activities and to honor the day through the purchase of American-made 
goods and services.

                                 <all>
```
#### James P. Wodka, Respondent, v Helen Wodka, Appellant. James P. Wodka, Respondent, v Helen Wodka, Appellant. Helen Wodka, Appellant, v James P. Wodka, Respondent.

(Appeal No. 2.)

— Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and matter remitted to Erie County Family Court for further proceedings, in accordance with the following memorandum: It was an abuse of discretion for the court to direct the parties’ child to return to New York State without first considering whether it was in the child’s best interests to do so *(see, Friederwitzer v Friederwitzer,*55 NY2d 89, 95; *Matter of Nehra v Uhlar,*43 NY2d 242; 4 Foster, Freed & Brandes, Law and the Family New York § 1:21 [2d ed]). In this regard, we note that Family Court on numerous occasions stated that it did not consider the child’s best interests relevant to its determination of the relocation issue. That was error. Accordingly, we reverse the order and remit the issue of the mother’s relocation for a hearing which is to be considered jointly with the custody hearing in *Wodka v Wodka,*([appeal No. 1] 168 AD2d 1000 [decided herewith]). (Appeal from order of Erie County Family Court, O’Donnell, J. — custody.) Present— Denman, J. P., Boomer, Pine, Davis and Lowery, JJ.