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

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3177 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3177

 To simplify the application used for the estimation and determination 
       of financial aid eligibility for postsecondary education.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 23, 2015

 Mr. Heck of Nevada (for himself, Mr. Roe of Tennessee, Mr. Polis, Mr. 
 Pocan, Mr. Kline, Mr. Scott of Virginia, Mr. Walberg, Mr. Messer, Mr. 
  Grothman, Ms. Stefanik, Mrs. Davis of California, Mr. Grijalva, Mr. 
   Sablan, Ms. Bonamici, Mr. Takano, Ms. Clark of Massachusetts, Mr. 
  DeSaulnier, Mr. Royce, Mr. Bucshon, and Mr. Kelly of Pennsylvania) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                      Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To simplify the application used for the estimation and determination 
       of financial aid eligibility for postsecondary education.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Simplifying the Application for 
Student Aid Act''.

SEC. 2. USING DATA FROM SECOND PRECEDING YEAR.

    Section 480(a)(1)(B) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
1087vv(a)(1)(B)) is amended to read as follows:
                    ``(B) Notwithstanding section 478(a) and beginning 
                not later than the second January 1 after the date of 
                enactment of the Simplifying the Application for 
                Student Aid Act, the Secretary shall provide for the 
                use of data from the second preceding tax year to carry 
                out the simplification of applications (including 
                simplification for a subset of applications) used for 
                the estimation and determination of financial aid 
                eligibility. Such simplification shall include the 
                sharing of data between the Internal Revenue Service 
                and the Department, pursuant to the consent of the 
                taxpayer.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### POWELL v. STATE.

No. 17949.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 12, 1936.

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

HAWKINS, Judge.

Conviction is for the theft of an automobile, punishment assessed at six years’ confinement in the penitentiary.

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

The judgment is affirmed.
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3126 

To prohibit the Commissioner of Social Security from furnishing the name 

of any individual in a report to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System unless a Federal court has determined the individual to be mentally defective. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 21, 2015 

Mr. ABRAHAM (for himself, Mr. BENISHEK, and Mr. JONES) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To prohibit the Commissioner of Social Security from furnishing the name of any individual in a report to the 

National Instant Criminal Background Check System unless a Federal court has determined the individual to 

be mentally defective. 

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

3 That upon a request by the Attorney General to the Com4 missioner of Social Security to furnish information pursu5 ant to section 103(e)(1) of the Brady Handgun Violence 

6 Prevention Act, the Commissioner of Social Security may 

7 not furnish the name of any individual entitled to benefits 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3126 IH

1 under title II of the Social Security Act, including any in2 dividual whose benefits are paid to a representative payee 

3 under section 205(j) of such Act, unless a Federal court 

4 has determined the individual to be mentally defective. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 12.02**CERTIFICATION**I, Tamihiko Sudo, certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Pioneer Corporation (the “registrant”); 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, resultsof operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby 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 proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. 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 theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (and persons performing the equivalentfunction): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe 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 whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        Date: September 8, 2005 /s/ Tamihiko Sudo   Tamihiko Sudo   Chief Financial OfficerPioneer Corporation
# Official Journal C 496/2021

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 496 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 649 December 2021 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 496

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 649 December 2021

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2021/C 496/01 | Commission Notice – Guidance document on the strict protection of animal species of Community interest under the Habitats Directive | 1 |

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2021/C 496/01

Commission Notice – Guidance document on the strict protection of animal species of Community interest under the Habitats Directive

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
### Source Categories Emissions (tons/yr) %Cumulative % Cyclic Crude and Intermediate Production [1] 1.36E+00 92.87 92.87 Miscellaneous Organic Chemical Manufacturing (MON) 1.04E-01 7.13 100.00

Total Emissions 1.46 100.00

Foot Notes [1] Cyclic Crude and Intermediate Production was titled Cyclic Crude and Intermediate Production (not subject to petroleum refining MACT) in the May 1999 Report 

### Quinoline
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1


                Independent Certified Public Accountants' Consent


The Board of Directors
iDine Rewards Network Inc.:


We consent to incorporation by reference into previously filed registration
statements on Forms S-3 (Registration Nos. 333-89406 and 333-49366) and on Forms
S-8 (Registration Nos. 333-101237, 333-72501, 33-49460 and 333-06747), of iDine
Rewards Network Inc. of our report dated February 5, 2003, relating to the
consolidated balance sheets of iDine Rewards Network Inc. and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 2002 and 2001, and the related consolidated statements of
operations, stockholders' equity, and cash flows for the year ended December 31,
2002, three-months ended December 31, 2001, and each of the years in the
two-year period ended September 30, 2001, and the related financial statement
schedule, which report appears in the December 31, 2002 annual report on Form
10-K of iDine Rewards Network Inc.

As discussed in note 1(h) to the consolidated financial statements, iDine
Rewards Network Inc. and Subsidiaries adopted the provisions of Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets, in
2002.


/s/ KPMG LLP


Fort Lauderdale, Florida
March 31, 2003
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 99-1391

___________

Earl Baker, *

*

Appellant, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the Western

v. * District of Arkansas.

*

Sears, Roebuck and Company, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellee. *

___________

 Submitted: September 17, 1999

Filed: September 22, 1999

___________

Before BEAM, FAGG, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Earl Baker appeals the district court's adverse grant of summary judgment in

favor of Sears, Roebuck and Company on Baker's age-based employment

discrimination claim. Baker's appeal has been submitted on the briefs. Having

reviewed the record and materials submitted by the parties, we conclude the district

court's decision is clearly correct. We also conclude there is nothing to be gained by

an extended discussion that rehashes the well-established principles of law in this factintensive case. The parties' submissions show they are thoroughly familiar with the

issues before the court and the controlling law. We thus affirm on the basis of the

district court's thorough memorandum opinion and order. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
-2-

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
#### LANDRUM v. STATE.

No. 14258.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 27, 1931.

Shelton *&*Shelton, of Austin, for appellant.

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

LATTIMORE, J.

Conviction for interfering with a railroad switch; punishment, two years in the penitentiary.

The statute under which this conviction was had is article 1335 of our Penal Code, which provides as follows: “If any person shall wilfully place any obstruction upon the track of any railroad, or remove any rail therefrom, or displace or interfere with any switch thereof, or in any way injure such road,” etc.

The indictment herein charges as follows, omitting formal parts: “That Elmer Landrum 7⁄8 3⁄8 7⁄8 then and there unlawfully and wilfully displace and interfere with a switch of the Missouri Pacific Railway Co. by cutting the copper wire in said switch there situate, whereby the lives of persons were endangered.”

We think this averment insufficient to charge a violation of the statute above referred to. There is no averment .that the switch referred to was a part of, or connected with, any railroad track. Said switch might have been abandoned, or might not yet have been installed as part of the track or in the yards of the railway company. The indictment appears to us to be bad. There are many kinds of switches; for instance, telephone switches, electric light switches, etc. These might be the property of a railway company. The evident intent of the statute in question as here applicable is to punish any person who shall willfully displace or interfere with any switch in the track of any railroad. We think it unquestionably necessary that it be averred that the switch was part of the track or connected with the track of said railway company.

For the error of the indictment referred to, the judgment will be reversed, and the prosecution ordered dismissed.
##### 



Exhibit 10.19
 EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
(Jim Rose)
 EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT Agreement Company Key
Employee Effective Date Financing provided
 W I
T N E S S E T H:
 WHEREAS,
 WHEREAS,
 NOW, THEREFORE,
 ARTICLE I
DEFINITIONS AND INTERPRETATIONS
 1.1 Definitions .
 Base Salary Section 2.3(a)
 Board
 Cause
 Section 3.8
    1




---



##### 



Change in Control
 Section
1.1(d)(ii) provided further however Section
1.1(d)(i) Section 1.1(d)(i)
 Section 1.1(d)(ii) Section
1.1(d)(i)
  2




---



##### 



Section 1.1(d) provided Section 1.1(d) Majority Shareholder (y) (y)
 Code
 Disability Company Physician Key Employees Physician
 Good Reason
    Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Rules
 Protection Period
 3




---



##### 



Severance Pay
   Severance Period
   Without Cause
 1.2 Interpretations .
 ARTICLE II
EMPLOYMENT AND DUTIES
 2.1 Term . Initial Term Renewal Term
 2.2 Position, Duties and Services .
 4




---



##### 



2.3 Compensation .
 Base Salary
 Bonuses and Perquisites
 Incentive, Savings, Profit Sharing, and Retirement Plans
 Welfare Benefit Plans
 2.4 Severance Benefit . ARTICLE III Section 2.1 ARTICLE III
 ARTICLE III
EARLY TERMINATION
 3.1 Death . Section 2.3
 3.2 Disability . Section 2.1 Section 2.3
 3.3 Termination for Cause or Voluntary Resignation by Key Employee .
 5




---



##### 



Section 2.3
 3.4 Termination Without Cause or for Good Reason Unrelated to a Change in Control . Section 2.1 Section 2.3
 3.5 Termination Without Cause or for Good Reason Related to a Change in Control . Section 2.3
 3.6 Termination of Companys Obligations . ARTICLE III Section
3.8
 3.7 Release . Section 3.7 Section 3.4 Section 3.5 i.e Section
2.3
 3.8 Non-Competition, Confidentiality .
 Agreement not to Compete Section 3.8(b) Section
3.8(b) Section
3.8
 6




---



##### 



Confidential Information
 Reasonableness of Restrictions Section 3.8 Section 3.8 Section 3.8 Section 3.8
 7




---



##### 



Enforcement Successor Employer Section 3.8 Section 3.8 Section 3.8
 3.9 Parachute Payments . ARTICLE III Section 3.9
 3.10 Payments Subject to Section 409A of the Code . ARTICLE III ARTICLE III
 8




---



##### 



ARTICLE IV
MISCELLANEOUS
 4.1 Governing Law .
 4.2 Amendment and Waiver .
 4.3 Severability .
 4.4 Entire Agreement . Section 2.3(c) Section 2.3(d)
 4.5 Withholding of Taxes and Other Employee Deductions .
 4.6 Headings .
 4.7 Actions by the Board .
 4.8 Construction .
  9




---



##### 



IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
 COMPANY:

ORION MARINE GROUP, INC.By:

/s/
J. Michael PearsonName:
    J. Michael PearsonTitle:
    President and Chief Executive OfficerKEY EMPLOYEE:/s/ Jim RoseJim Rose Signature Page to  Employment Agreement  (Jim Rose)
#### MAULTSBY v. STATE.

No. 13449.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Dec. 17, 1930.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 4, 1931.

*148G. A. Walters, of San Saba, for appellant-.

A. A. Dawson, State’s Atty., of Canton, for the State.

LATTIMORE, *J.*

Conviction for selling intoxicating liquor; punishment, two years in the penitentiary.

This is a case upon substantially the same facts as appear in cause No. 13450, Maultsby v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 34 S.W. (2d) 289, opinion handed down at a former day of this term. The trial term of the court below adjourned November 6, 1929. When appellant’s motion for new trial was overruled he was expressly given eighty days after adjournment of court in which to file bills of exception and statement of facts. Computation shows this time to have expired on January 25th. The only bill of exceptions in the record was filed on February 4th, which is manifestly too late to be considered by us.

We see no good to come from an extended discussion of the facts. The state witness testified to the sale of the liquor. Appellant and his witnesses attempted to discredit the good faith of the prosecution, and to show that same resulted from an effort on the part of appellant to collect from prosecuting witness money due for the sale of pecans. These fact questions were fo^ the jury, and we are not disposed to overturn their settlement of same.

No error appearing, the judgment will be affirmed.

On Motion for Rehearing.

HAWKINS, J.

Appellant complains that his claim of. newly discovered evidence set up in his motion for new trial was not sustained. It appears from the face of his motion that the claimed newly discovered evidence could by the use of proper diligence have been inown to appellant during the trial. The witness was present in the court at the instance of the state. The state did not call him. No effort seems to have been made by appellant to ascertain what his testimony would be if-placed upon the witness stand. The witness withheld nothing from appellant, nor misled him in any way. No affidavit of the witness is attached to the motion for new trial, nor is there any showing why such affidavit was not attached. ' West v. State, 2 Tex. App. 209. See, also, Branch’s Ann. Tex. P. 0. § 197, under which many authorities are collated. If any evidence was heard upon the motion for new trial upon the point as to what the claimed newly discovered witness would testify, the record is silent on it. The court would not be bound by what is stated in the motion in that regard, although the motion was sworn to by appellant. The motion for new trial is ordinarily regarded as a pleading only.

The facts need not be discussed. They are practically the same as in No. 13,450, Maultsby v. State' (Tex. Cr. App.) 34 S.W.(2d) 289, in which motion for rehearing was overruled on the 7th day of January, 1931, and the facts thoroughly analyzed in the opinion on rehearing.

The motion for rehearing is overruled.
EXHIBIT 31.1 CERTIFICATION

Certification of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Rule 13A-14 or 15D-14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 
as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes  Oxley Act of 2002

I, Norman Meier, certify that:

1.
     I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q for the period ended April 30, 2008 of Tecton 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 in order 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.
     I am 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 the annual report is being prepared;b)
     evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer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; andc)
     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;5.
     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 function):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; andb)
     any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuers control over financial reporting.


Date: June 17, 2008
     By: /s/ Norman Meier
      Norman Meier
      Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer


---
### Todd C. Emerson, #8175 444 South River Road St. George, Utah, 84790 Telephone: (435) 634-3530 Facsimile: (435) 634-3505 Attorney for Sky West Airlines, Inc. 

# RECEIVED DEC -3 2013 

## HEARING DOCKET

UNITED STATES OFAMERICA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

In the Matter of:
SkyWest Airlines, Inc. WASIDNGTON, D.C.

NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF AARON PERKINS FDMS No. FAA-2013-0292 FAA Case No. 2012NM060025 Judge: Richard C. Goodwin

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 

### §46104(c2,49 C.F.R. 

### § 821.19(a) 811d 

### the Federal Rules ofCivil Procedure, RespondentSky West Airlines will take the deposition ofAaron Perkins on Jaiiuary 10, 2014 beginning at 10:00 a.m., and continuing.t)lereafter until completed at the offices ofSeattleDeposition Reporters, 600 University Street (at Sixth Avel'ue), Suite**~20,** Seattle, Washington 98101, before a certified court reporter having the power to administer oaths. DATED this 26th day ofNovember, 2013.

# ~

# ~15 Todd C. Emerson Attorney for Sky West Airlines, Inc.CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that on this 261 h day ofNovember, 2013, I caused to be served the foregoing NOTICE OF DEPOSITION OF AARON PERKINS via facsimile and United States mail, first class postage pre-paid, onthe following: The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin Office ofHearings, M-20 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. East Building Ground Floor, RmE12-320 Washington, D.C. 20590 {US. 

### Mail} Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue SW Washington, DC 20591 Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Will;mr.Wrigh.t Building- Suite 2W1000

., '' 

### {US. Mail} Robert Spitzer Federal Aviation Administration NorthwestMountain Region, ANM-7 1601 LindAvenue S.W. Renton, Washington 98057 

### {Facsimile and US. Mail}



### 2