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

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 118 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 7, 2018 

Received and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Authorizing the printing of ‘‘United States Capitol Grounds: 

Landscape Architect Frederick Law Olmstead’s Design 

for Democracy’’ as a House document. 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), 

3 SECTION 1. UNITED STATES CAPITOL GROUNDS: LAND4 SCAPE ARCHITECT FREDERICK LAW 

5 OLMSTEAD’S DESIGN FOR DEMOCRACY. 

6 (a) PRINTING AS HOUSE DOCUMENT.—The book en7 titled ‘‘United States Capitol Grounds: Landscape Archi8 tect Frederick Law Olmstead’s Design for Democracy’’, 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

HCON 118 RFS 

1 prepared by the Office of the Architect of the Capitol, shall 

2 be printed as a House document under the direction of 

3 the Joint Committee on Printing. 

4 (b) STYLE; BINDING.—The book described in sub5 section (a) shall be printed in such style, form, and man6 ner and with such binding as the Joint Committee on 

7 Printing may direct, in consultation with the Clerk of the 

8 House of Representatives and the Secretary of the Senate. 

9 (c) NUMBER OF COPIES.—In addition to the usual 

10 number of copies, there shall be printed for the use of the 

11 Architect of the Capitol the lesser of— 

12 (1) 5,000 copies of the book printed under this 

13 section; or 

14 (2) such number of copies of the book as does 

15 not exceed a total production and printing cost of 

16 $400,000. 

Passed the House of Representatives April 26, 2018. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                               ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Aceto Corporation, a New York
corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-K for the period ended June 30, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Leonard S. Schwartz, Chairman, President and Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 18 U.S.C. 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) and
          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/ Leonard S. Schwartz
    Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
    September 26, 2003




                                        4
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 221 (Friday, November 15, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 90326]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-26556]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: November 15, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
November 5, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 638 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-287, K2025-285.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-26556 Filed 11-14-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
III 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 148 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 21, 2018 

Received 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Directing the Secretary of the Senate to make a correction 

in the enrollment of the bill S. 3628. 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), That in the enrollment of the bill S. 3628, 

3 the Secretary of the Senate shall make the following 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

HCON 148 RDS 

1 correction: Strike ‘‘November 30, 2018’’ each place such 

2 term appears and insert ‘‘December 7, 2018’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives December 21, 

2018. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM ALLEN
TELECOM'S DECEMBER 31, 1995 CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENT AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                          15,706
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   83,247
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,232)
<INVENTORY>                                     70,152
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               177,814
<PP&E>                                          98,036
<DEPRECIATION>                                (20,912)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 363,565
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           84,443
<BONDS>                                         47,058
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        29,595
<OTHER-SE>                                     180,782
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   363,565
<SALES>                                        315,377
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               315,377
<CGS>                                        (196,119)
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                (196,119)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (69,540)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  (80)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (1,821)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 47,817
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (19,270)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             25,520
<DISCONTINUED>                                   7,119
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    32,639
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.25<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.22<F1>
<FN>
<F1>The Earnings per Share amounts have been restated to conform to the provisions
of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 128, "Earnings per Share".
We have replaced primary and fully diluted amounts with basic and diluted per
share amounts, respectively.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________

NO. 09-12-00491-CR

____________________

CHRISTOPHER EUGENE GATSON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

_________________________________ ______________________ 

On Appeal from the 1st District Court 

Jasper County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 10573JD 

____________________________________________ ____________ 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

A jury convicted Christopher Eugene Gatson of aggravated robbery and the 

trial court sentenced Gatson to twenty years in prison. Gatson’s appellate counsel 

filed a brief that presents counsel’s professional evaluation of the record and 

concludes Gatson’s appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 

(1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). We granted an 

extension of time for Gatson to file a pro se brief, but we received no response 

from Gatson. We have determined that this appeal is wholly frivolous. We have 
2

independently examined the clerk’s record and the reporter’s record, and we agree 

that no arguable issues support an appeal. We find it unnecessary to order 

appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Compare Stafford v. State, 813 

S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgment.1

AFFIRMED.

 ______________________________

 STEVE McKEITHEN

 Chief Justice

Submitted on November 12, 2013

Opinion Delivered January 8, 2014

Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.

 1

Gatson may challenge our decision by filing a petition for discretionary 

review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 11

                              POLYMER GROUP, INC.
                       COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
                     (In Thousands, Except Per Share Data)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                 Three Months
                                                                     Ended
                                                                ---------------
                                                                 April   April
                                                                  1,      3,
                                                                 2000    1999
                                                                ------- -------
<S>                                                             <C>     <C>
Basic:
  Net income................................................... $ 2,137 $ 5,832
  Average common shares outstanding............................  32,003  32,000
  Net income per common share--basic........................... $  0.07 $  0.18
Diluted:
  Net income................................................... $ 2,137 $ 5,832
  Average common shares outstanding............................  32,148  32,000
  Net income per common share--diluted......................... $  0.07 $  0.18
</TABLE>
EXHIBIT
32.2


CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,




AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In
connection with the Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2008 of AMERCO (the
“Company”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 4, 2008
(the “Report”), I, Jason A. Berg, Chief Accounting Officer of the Company,
certify, 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.





AMERCO,


a Nevada
corporation





/s/ Jason A.
Berg


Jason A.
Berg


Chief
Accounting Officer


Date:  June
4, 2008
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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         November 13, 2024.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on October 29, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 565 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-192, K2025-190.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2024-26306 Filed 11-12-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-4112

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

STACY ERWIN JONES,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern

District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Thomas E. Johnston, 

District Judge. (2:14-cr-00080-1)

Submitted: September 18, 2015 Decided: September 29, 2015

Before WILKINSON and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, 

Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gregory J. Campbell, CAMPBELL LAW OFFICE, Charleston, West 

Virginia, for Appellant. R. Booth Goodwin II, United States 

Attorney, Joshua C. Hanks, Assistant United States Attorney, 

Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Stacy Erwin Jones appeals the district court’s judgment 

sentencing him to 30 months in prison and 3 years of supervised 

release after the jury convicted him of aiding and abetting the 

distribution of heroin. In the district court, Jones objected 

to the probation officer’s calculation of his relevant conduct, 

but his attorney withdrew the objection in an agreement with the 

Government resulting in a lower Guidelines range. On appeal, he 

raises the issue of whether the district court erred in 

accepting defense counsel’s withdrawal of his objections and 

determining his relevant conduct pursuant to the agreement 

between defense counsel and the Government. We affirm.

Jones did not challenge the district court’s acceptance of 

counsel’s withdrawal in the district court. We thus review this 

issue for plain error. See United States v. Obey, 790 F.3d 545, 

547 (4th Cir. 2015). Jones “must show that an error occurred, 

that it was plain, and that it affected his substantial rights.” 

Id. (citation omitted). Even if he makes this showing, “we will 

correct the error only if it seriously affect[s] the fairness, 

integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings.” Id.

(citation and internal quotation marks omitted). We have 

reviewed the record and Jones’ brief, and we conclude that he 

fails to show plain error affecting his substantial rights.
3

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-17-00128-CR

ROY WAYNE GLENN,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 19th District Court

McLennan County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2016-1796-C1

ORDER ON REHEARING

The Court received a document from appellant dated August 6, 2018. The Court 

is unsure what appellant intended the document to be: a new notice of appeal, a motion 

for rehearing, a petition for discretionary review, or a post-conviction writ of habeas 

corpus pursuant to article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. The opinion 

in this proceeding was issued on August 1, 2018. Due to the close proximity in time from 

the issuance of the opinion and the date of the document, the Court considers the 

document from appellant to be a motion for rehearing.
Glenn v. State Page 2

After considering the motion and the facts of the case, appellant’s motion for 

rehearing is denied.

PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

Motion denied

Order issued and filed August 22, 2018
#### Liberty (A. J.), Plaintiff and Appellant, vs. Liberty (Paul), Respondent: Liberty (John), Executor, Garnishee Defendant and Appellant.

*October 14*

November *9, 1937.*

*142The cause was submitted for the appellants on the brief of *Hughes & Hughes*and *Doar & Knowles,*all of New Richmond, attorneys for A. J. Liberty, and *F. M. White*of River Falls, attorney for John Liberty, and for the respondent on "that of *W. G. Haddow*of Ellsworth and *C. E. Warner*of Minneapolis, Minnesota.

FaiRCHIld, J.

In the court below this case was tried, and here on appeal was argued, together with the case of *Liberty (A. J.) v. Liberty (Urban), ante,*p. 136, 276 N. W. 121. Judgment was for Warner and Haddow in the amount of $259.47, the value of their services and their expenses and disbursements in the county court action, and $56.55, costs and disbursements in the present action; for plaintiff in the sum of $186.73. It had been determined in the county court action that the garnishee defendant was indebted to Paul Liberty, principal defendant, in the amount of $502.75. Except for the name of the principal defendant in each case and the amounts involved, the issues and facts are identical. The decision in the companion case must therefore control this one.

*By the Court.*

Upon the garnishee’s appeal, judgment reversed in part; upon appeal of plaintiff, judgment modified by adding $56.55 to the amount allowed plaintiff, and, as modified, affirmed.
United States of America
OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION
1120 20th Street, N.W., Ninth Floor
Washington, DC 20036-3457



SECRETARY OF LABOR,

Complainant,

v.
OSHRC Docket No. 17-0138
HOME RUBBER COMPANY, LP, 

Respondent.

ORDER
On April 1, 2021, the Secretary filed a “Motion to Sever and for Entry of a Final Order” with respect to “the twenty citation items . . . [in this case] that are not currently before the Commission for review.”  See Commission Rule 10, 29 C.F.R. § 2200.10 (stating the Commission, upon “a showing of good cause,” may sever claims or parties from a proceeding).  The Commission has considered the motion and related filings.  The motion is denied.  See R&R Builders, Inc., 14 BNA OSHC 1844 (No. 88-282, 1990) (denying motion to sever for lack of good cause); LTV Steel Co., 13 BNA OSHC 1090, 1090 (No. 86-449-A, 1987) (finding a lack of good cause to sever and noting the “drawbacks [of] piecemeal adjudication”); see also Commission Rule 92(a), 29 C.F.R. § 2200.92 (stating that direction for review “establishes jurisdiction in the Commission to review the entire case” and “issues to be decided . . . are within the [Commission’s] discretion”).
SO ORDERED.
BY DIRECTION OF THE COMMISSION




/s/					
Dated:	April 27, 2021				John X. Cerveny
						Executive Secretary
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 99.1

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 Annual Report of Alaska Airlines, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the three years ended December 31, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, William
S. Ayer, 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.

/s/ William S. Ayer


William S. Ayer
Chief Executive Officer
March 28, 2003
Upload 300/301 Data Page 1 of 2

Upload 300/301 Data 

If you are submitting data for a large number of establishments, using the “Upload 300/301 Data” 

option can help speed up the process. This option allows you to submit a comma-separated 

values (CSV) file containing batch establishment data. This option is not recommended for use if 

you have only one or a few establishments to enter data for. Note: The corresponding 300A data 

must already be in the application prior to using this upload option U ANDU the establishment 

names entered on the 300/301 submission must match the 300A entry. 

Reference the 32T U DOL OSHA ITA Case Data CSV SpecificationsU 32T as well as the 32T CSV file template 32T and

32T CSV sample file 32T for additional information.

Complete the following steps to upload a CSV file for 300/301 data.

1. Select the “Upload 300/301 Data” button in the “For Batch Data Transmission” section 

on the “Injury Tracking Application” screen, or

2. Select the “Upload 300/301 Data” option from the dropdown “Navigation Menu”.

3. Create a CSV file using the instructions and template provided on the “Upload 300/301 

Data” screen under “Step 1: Read the Instructions” section.

REMINDER: Do not include any personally identifiable information (PII) pertaining to worker(s) 

involved in the incident (e.g., no names, phone numbers, or SSNs) in the narrative fields.

4. After the CSV file has been created, select the “Choose File” button under “Step 2: 

Locate and Select Your File” section. Locate your CSV file, select the file and then select 

the “Open” button.

5. In the “Step 3: Agree to the terms and conditions below” section, read the Terms and 

Conditions, and select the checkbox to indicate agreement.

6. In the “Step 4: Upload Your File” section, select the “Upload” button and Select Your 

File” section. Locate your CSV file, select the file and then select the “Open” button.

Following the submission of 300/301 CSV file, you will receive a confirmation on-screen as well 

as a follow-up email notification. Additional emails indicating if the data in your file was 
Upload 300/301 Data Page 2 of 2

correctly formatted will be sent once the system has finished processing your file. The 

processing of files occurs at regular three-hour intervals in the order they were received. 

Depending on the volume of file submissions, it may take some time before an ITA user’s file is 

processed and receive the processing results. 

If you need further assistance, please complete the 32T ITA Help Request Form32T .