alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Iowa ADT finds Asadabad merchants better off than five years ago

/ Published Dec. 6, 2010

ASADABAD, Afghanistan, - Members of the Iowa National Guard’s 734th Agribusiness Development Team found that 24 of 25 shopkeepers surveyed in Asadabad, Dec. 2 were better off or much better off than they were five years ago, and all paid taxes, though a majority thought they were too high. 

Additionally, all of the shopkeepers in the provincial capital of Kunar said they would contact a government official to address pressing concerns, though opinions on the quality of government services were mixed. None surveyed identified security as a problem and all described the security situation as good or excellent.

One of the shopkeepers the ADT surveyed was Nuuora, a merchant who sells seed, fertilizer and other items. His complaint with the government sounded not unlike those of businessmen everywhere.

“I pay 4,800 afghanis [$106] per year in taxes, and they can’t even keep this canal clean,” Nuuora said, gesturing at the foot-wide gutter in front of his open storefront.

Nevertheless, Nuuora, who has two wives and 13 children, conceded he was much better off than just a few years ago, when he was a refugee in Afghanistan. 

Nuuora’s experience was not unique among the Asadabad merchants surveyed, the majority of whom fled Afghanistan during the Taliban’s rule and returned within just the last few years.

The ADT surveyed a wide range of business owners, from a hand tool dealer, to a sewing machine repair and sale concern, a women and children’s clothing boutique, a high-end jewelry store, a wholesale fruit and vegetable market, a hand-made custom furniture shop and many more. 

U.S. Army Capt. Pat Birgy, the ADT’s finance officer, organized the Asadabad market survey, the second by the ADT in as many months.

“Our first time out, we were mainly looking at food prices, sources and availability,” Birgy said. “This time, we wanted to take a more broad approach and find out more about how business actually works here.”

Birgy admitted to being surprised by the diversity of goods available for sale in Asadabad, and by some of the survey responses, too. Moreover, said Birgy, the information gleaned from the survey will positively impact his work in mentoring the provincial budget director.

“There is no doubt there is a very, very vibrant business sector here, with a lot of economic activity, more than I think any of us thought,” Birgy said. “I wasn’t expecting to find a functional tax system already in place but clearly, there is, and now I can sit down with the finance directorate to get a better idea of what that system is and we can go from there.”

The ADT’s deputy commander, U.S. Army Lt. Col. Dave Lewis, took part in the Asadabad business survey. He also is a key leader of the ADT’s initiative to mentor Kunar provincial officials of the government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan.

“This survey really shows that the provincial government is doing a lot of things right already,” Lewis said. “It gives us better situational awareness as we interact with our counterparts in the Afghan government.”
EXHIBIT 31(a)

| |  |  | CERTIFICATION |  | OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14 OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
| |  |  | ------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I, Dr. Nafi Onat, chief executive officer of Star Energy Corporation (Registrant) certify that:

1.     I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB (Report) of Registrant;

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 period 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 Registrant and have:

a)     Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the Registrant, is made known to me 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 my 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 registrants 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.     I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the Registrants auditors and the audit committee of 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 controls 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 controls over financial reporting.

Date: May 12, 2006

/s/ Dr. Nafi Onat

Dr. Nafi Onat

Chief Executive Officer

20

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 21-0337

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

ISAIAH JAMES PEHRINGER,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including September 6, 2022, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 28 2022

07/28/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0337
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2693 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2693

 To amend the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 
 1992 to authorize additional projects related to the Salton Sea, and 
                          for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            August 10, 2021

 Mr. Padilla (for himself and Mrs. Feinstein) introduced the following 
bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 
 1992 to authorize additional projects related to the Salton Sea, and 
                          for other purposes.

    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 ``Salton Sea Projects Improvements 
Act''.

SEC. 2. RESEARCH PROJECT.

    Section 1101 of the Reclamation Projects Authorization and 
Adjustment Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-575; 106 Stat. 4661) is 
amended--
            (1) by redesignating subsections (b) through (d) as 
        subsections (c) through (e), respectively;
            (2) by inserting after subsection (a) the following:
    ``(b) Additional Project Authorities.--
            ``(1) In general.--The Secretary of the Interior, acting 
        through the Commissioner of Reclamation, may provide grants and 
        enter into contracts and cooperative agreements to carry out 
        projects located in the area of the Salton Sea in southern 
        California to improve air quality, fish and wildlife habitat, 
        recreational opportunities, and water quality, in partnership 
        with--
                    ``(A) State, Tribal, and local governments;
                    ``(B) water districts;
                    ``(C) joint powers authorities, including the 
                Salton Sea Authority;
                    ``(D) nonprofit organizations; and
                    ``(E) institutions of higher education.
            ``(2) Included activities.--The projects described in 
        paragraph (1) may include--
                    ``(A) construction, operation, maintenance, 
                permitting, and design activities required for the 
                projects; and
                    ``(B) dust suppression projects.''; and
            (3) in subsection (e) (as so redesignated), by striking 
        ``$10,000,000'' and inserting ``$250,000,000''.
                                 <all>
```
#### Abraham Myers, *vs.*Thomas Skrine.

<3 *legatee, under the will of which defendant was executor, drew an order on defendant, in favor of complainant, to be paid ont of the legacy: on a bill to compel the executor to account and pay the amount of the order, the pled of the statute of limita* tions was sustained.*

It appears that a legatee under the will of which defendant was executor, drew an order on defendant, in favor of complainant, to be paid ont of the legacy; which order defendant accepted. The bill was filed after the lapse of four years, from the acceptance of the order, to compel the defendant to account and to pay the amount of the order. Defendant pleaded the statute of limitations.

Chancellor *Thompson.*

The rule of law is, that the statute of limitations will not run against a legatee suing for a legacy. The reason is obvious. The executor and legatee stands in the relation of trustee andcestuiqui trust, and so long as that relation exists, the statute is no bar. But if the legatee receives a cote or bond from the executor, in lieu of the legacy, *180it creates a new obligation, and in the event of the insolvency of the estate, he is individually liable. The present is an analogous case. The legatee drew an inland'bill of exchange on the executor, who accepted it. The legatee received a valuable consideration for it, and, eo instanti, the trust was executed, and a new debt was created between the drawee and payee, with whom there was no trust, and subject to the'operation of the statute. It is ordered and decreed that the plea be sustained and the complainant’s bill be dismissed with costs.

On appeal, it was contended that this was not a bill of exchange being an order to pay out of a particular fund, 1 *Esp. Dig. 25; 3 Wils.*209, 213. It was merely an authority to the payee to receive, or an equitable assignment of so much of the legacy, and did not destroy the fiduciary relation between the executor and the legatee or his assignee. • A suit could not have been sustained at law, without shewing funds in the executor’s hands; and this could only be done by calling him to an account in this court.

Decree affirmed

Chancellors *Thompson, Desaussure, Guillará*and *James,*concurring.
<PAGE>
 
                                                             EXHIBIT NUMBER 11.1
                                                             -------------------


             INFORMATION MANAGEMENT RESOURCES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY

                 COMPUTATION OF PRO FORMA NET INCOME PER SHARE

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                   Year Ended December 31,
                                                  -------------------------
                                                      1996          1995
                                                  -----------   -----------
<S>                                               <C>           <C>
Pro Forma Net Income                              $ 2,544,931   $ 1,612,471
                                                  ===========   ===========

PRIMARY:
 Common Shares                                      6,870,188     9,050,960
 Stock Option Plans
  Shares under option at year-end                   5,083,287     5,294,445
  Treasury Shares which could be purchased           (233,024)     (676,130)
                                                  -----------   -----------
Pro forma weighted average common and
 common equivalent shares outstanding              11,720,451    13,669,275
                                                  ===========   ===========
 
Pro forma net income per share                    $      0.22   $      0.12
                                                  ===========   ===========
 
FULLY DILUTED:
 Common Shares                                      6,870,188     9,050,960
 Stock Option Plans
  Shares under option at year-end                   5,083,287     5,294,445
  Treasury Shares which could be purchased           (169,492)     (676,130)
                                                  -----------   ----------- 
Pro forma weighted average common and
 common equivalent shares outstanding              11,783,983    13,669,275
                                                  ===========   ===========
 
Pro forma net income per share                    $      0.22   $      0.12
                                                  ===========   ===========
</TABLE>
Section 1350 Certifications

CERTIFICATE OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



I, Leftheris Georgakopoulos, President and I, Ron Lizee, Chief Financial Officer of Acrongenomics Inc., certify that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB (the "Report") for the quarter ended June 30, 2004, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof:



(i)

fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities

Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and



(i)

the information contained in the Report fairly presents in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Acrongenomics Inc.





| | By: | /s/ Leftheris Georgakopoulous
President
| | --- | ---------------------------------------





| | By: | /s/ Ron Lizee
Chief Financial Officer(who also performs the function of principal chief executive officer and principal accounting officer)
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Acrongenomics Inc., and will be retained by Acrongenomics Inc., and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, December 01, 2016.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, December 01, 2016

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A17I0082. KERRY LEON JAMISON v. WAL-MART STORES EAST, LP, d/b/a 

WALMART; WAL-MART STORES, INC., d/b/a WALMART, et al..

Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

14A53419
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 12

- 00060

- CV

ROBERT BONNER , Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

From the 413th District Court Johnson County, Texas Trial Court No. C200700320

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On February 21, 2012, this Court sent appellant, Robert Bonner, a letter informing him that his notice of appeal in this matter contained several deficiencies, including a failure to comply with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.1. See T EX

. R.

A PP

. P. 25.1. In response to our letter, on March 2, 2012, Bonner filed a five

- page document addressing the deficiencies. However, in reviewing his March 2, 2012 filing, we notice that Bonner did not include proof that he served his filing on all parties to the trial court’s final judgment, as required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.1(e).Bonner v. State Page 2

See id. at R. 25.1(e) (“The notice of appeal must be served on all parties to the trial court’s final judgment or, in an interlocutory appeal, on all parties to the tr ial court proceeding.”); see also id. at R. 9.5(a) (“At or before the time of a document’s filing, the filing party must serve a copy on all parties to the proceeding.”), (d) (“A document presented for filing must contain a proof of service in the form of either an acknowledgement of service by the person served or a certificate of service.”). As we noted in our February 21, 2012 letter, Bonner’s failure to file a compliant notice of appeal within 21 days of our letter “will result in the dismissal of his appeal without further notification for failure to comply with this order or notice from the Clerk.” See

id. at R. 42.3(c). Because Bonner’s notice of appeal still is not compliant with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.1, we dismiss his appeal in thi s matter. See id.

AL SCOGGINS Justice Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Scoggins Appeal dismissed Opinion delivered and filed March 21, 2012 [CV06]
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. 

Wuiteb $tates (!Court of §ppeaIs 

for tbe jf eberaI (!Circuit 

K-TEC, INC., 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v. 

VITA-MIX CORPORATION, 

Defendant·Appellant. 

2011-1244, -1484 

Appeals from the United States District Court for the 

District of Utah in case no. 06-CV·0108, Judge Tena 

Campbell. 

ON MOTION 

ORDER 

Upon consideration of K-TEC, Inc.'s unopposed motion 

to lift the stay of the briefing schedule and to set July 26, 

2011 as the due date for Vita-Mix Corporation's opening 

brief, 

IT Is ORDERED THAT: 

The motion is granted. 
K-TEC v. VITA-MIX CORP 

Jll 182011 

Date 

cc: Brett L. Foster, Esq. 

Alan L. Briggs, Esq. 

s21 

FOR THE COURT 

lsI Jan Horbaly 

Jan Horbaly 

Clerk 

2 

FILED 

8.s_ COURT OF APPEALS FOR 

THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT 

JUL 1 82011 

JANHORBALY 

CLERK
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 359 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 359

                    For the relief of Geert Botzen.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 8, 2009

Ms. Lee of California introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                    For the relief of Geert Botzen.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR GEERT BOTZEN.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of section 
201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Geert Botzen shall be 
eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa or for adjustment of status 
to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence upon 
filing an application for issuance of an immigrant visa under section 
204 of such Act or for adjustment of status to lawful permanent 
resident.
    (b) Adjustment of Status.--If Geert Botzen enters the United States 
before the filing deadline specified in subsection (c), and is not 
inadmissible under paragraph (2) or (3) of section 212(a) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, he shall be considered to have entered 
and remained lawfully and shall be eligible for adjustment of status 
under section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as of the date 
of the enactment of this Act.
    (c) Deadline for Application and Payment of Fees.--Subsections (a) 
and (b) shall apply only if the application for issuance of an 
immigrant visa or the application for adjustment of status is filed 
with appropriate fees within 2 years after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
    (d) Reduction of Immigrant Visa Number.--Upon the granting of an 
immigrant visa or permanent residence to Geert Botzen, the Secretary of 
State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by 1, during the 
current or next following fiscal year, the total number of immigrant 
visas that are made available to natives of the country of the alien's 
birth under section 203(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act or, 
if applicable, the total number of immigrant visas that are made 
available to natives of the country of the alien's birth under section 
202(e) of such Act.
                                 <all>
```
FEi 25 2003

p1 iO W

Mr. Donald S. Welsh OFFICE OF REGlOAL A4INiSTRATOHRegional AdministratorU. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III

1650 Arch Street

Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029

Re: Petition for Delisting of Hazardous Wastes

Dear Mr. Welsh:

Enclosed is a Petition pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 6921(f) requesting the delisting of

wastes identified by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality as F006

hazardous wastes. In accordance with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

Memorandum of Agreement between EPA and Virginia DEQ, we are also forwarding the

Petition to DEQ.

The Petition is submitted by BWX Technologies, Inc., operating through its

Nuclear Products Division (“BWXT”). BWXT manufactures and supplies products andservices to the U.S. Government and other entities in the nuclear power industry.

We believe that the Petition demonstrates, and data generated and to be generated

will confirm, that the petitioned wastes meet the legal standard for delisting. Consistent

with the legal standard, the wastes pose no substantial present or potential hazard to

human health or the environment. Further, the petitioned wastes are unique in the being

regulated under the RCRA hazardous wastes program, the Nuclear Regulatory

Commission’s radioactive wastes program, and the NPDES program. If the wastes aredelisted, they will continue to be regulated under the NRC and NPDES programs.

We are also forwarding this Petition to Mr. David Friedman of Region III, with

whom we have had substantial prior discussions concerning the petitioned wastes and the

development of the Petition. We will contact Mr. Friedman in about two weeks to follow

up on the Petition. BWXT’s principal contact is Mr. John M. Storton, at the addressabove (434/522-6677). Please feel free to contact Mr. Storton, if we may provide any

additional information in the meantime.
Manager, Environmental Safety Health &

Safeguards Department

Copies:

Robert G. Burnley, Virginia Department of Environmental Quality

David Friedman, EPA Region III

John M. Storton, BWXT