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

Calendar No. 427 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3951 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 10, 2009 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

MAY 18, 2010 

Reported by Mr. LIEBERMAN, without amendment 

MAY 20, 2010 

Previous reporting vitiated 

JUNE 14, 2010 

Reported by Mr. LIEBERMAN, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 2000 Louisiana Avenue in New Orleans, Louisiana, as the ‘‘Roy Rondeno, Sr. Post Office Building’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. ROY RONDENO, SR. POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

5 Postal Service located at 2000 Louisiana Avenue in New 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3951 RS2

1 Orleans, Louisiana, shall be known and designated as the 

2 ‘‘Roy Rondeno, Sr. Post Office Building’’. 

3 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg4 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

5 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

6 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Roy Rondeno, Sr. 

7 Post Office Building’’. 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS

jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 427 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3951 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostSr. Post Office Building’’. New Orleans, Louisiana, as the ‘‘Roy Rondeno, al Service located at 2000 Louisiana Avenue in 

JUNE 14, 2010 

Reported without amendment 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

WESTERN DIVISION

Antwon Cornett, 

Petitioner, 

v. Case No. 1:17cv624 

Warden, London 

Correctional Institution, Judge Michael R. Barrett 

Respondent. 

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) filed by the 

Magistrate Judge on October 19, 2018 (Doc. 10). 

Proper notice has been given to the parties under 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1)(C), including 

notice that the parties would waive further appeal if they failed to file objections to the Report 

and Recommendation in a timely manner. United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 

1981). No objections to the Magistrate Judge=s R&R (Doc. 10) have been filed. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the R&R (Doc. 10) of the Magistrate Judge is hereby 

ADOPTED. Consistent with the recommendation by the Magistrate Judge, Petitioner's 

Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 3) is DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 2254 on the ground that the petition is time-barred under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). 

 
2

Any request for certificate of appealability or request to certify an appeal would not be 

taken in good faith and would be denied. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 s/Michael R. Barrett 

Michael R. Barrett, Judge 

United States District Court
Exhibit 32.1
                     Certification Pursuant to Section 906
                       of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


In connection with the filing of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Park
Hill Capital III Corp. (the "Company") for the period ended June 30, 2006
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, I, Yao De Rong, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the
best of my knowledge and belief:

     1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
        15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and

     2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
        material respects, the financial condition and results or operations
        of the Company.



/s/ YAO DE RONG                                       November 14, 2006
---------------------------------
Yao De Rong
Chief Executive Officer

<PAGE>
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4205 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 4205

 To extend certain housing-related deadlines in the Heartland Disaster 
                        Tax Relief Act of 2008.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            December 3, 2009

Mr. Loebsack (for himself, Mr. Boswell, Mr. Latham, Mr. Braley of Iowa, 
and Mr. King of Iowa) introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To extend certain housing-related deadlines in the Heartland Disaster 
                        Tax Relief Act of 2008.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF SPECIAL RULES FOR USE OF RETIREMENT FUNDS.

    Section 702(d)(10) of the Heartland Disaster Tax Relief Act of 2008 
(Public Law 110-343; 122 Stat. 3916) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``January 1, 2010'' both places it appears 
        and inserting ``January 1, 2011'', and
            (2) by striking ``December 31, 2009'' both places it 
        appears and inserting ``December 31, 2010''.

SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN CANCELLATION OF INDEBTEDNESS 
              INCOME.

    Section 702(e)(4)(C) of the Heartland Disaster Tax Relief Act of 
2008 (Public Law 110-343; 122 Stat. 3918) is amended by striking 
``January 1, 2010'' and inserting ``January 1, 2011''.
                                 <all>
```
##### 



1.
    
    I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Ivanhoe Energy Inc.;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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a  15(f) and 15d  15(f)) 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.)
    
    designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such
internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to
provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and
the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles;c.)
    
    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; andd.)
    
    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 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting;
 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 registrants board of directors:
 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; andb.)
    
    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.
  
 By:
    
    /s/ E. Leon DanielE. Leon Daniel
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-K
FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0001002531
<NAME> TOLLGRADE COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                       4,591,273
<SECURITIES>                                12,342,592
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,458,023
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  8,569,818
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            31,683,235
<PP&E>                                       4,242,793
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,473,136
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              34,625,630
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,451,604
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,124,083
<OTHER-SE>                                  28,881,488
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                34,625,630
<SALES>                                     37,489,949
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            37,489,949
<CGS>                                       18,321,677
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               18,321,677
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              8,773,376
<INCOME-TAX>                                 3,176,753
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 5,596,623
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .94
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .93
        

</TABLE>
#### Edith Millien et al., Appellants, v Millar Elevator Industries, Inc., Respondent.

[774 NYS2d 764]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Steinhardt, J.), dated April 22, 2003, as, upon reargument, adhered to its prior determination in an order dated January 14, 2003, denying their motion (a) to vacate so much of an order of the same court (R. Goldberg, J.), dated November 11, 1999, as, sua sponte, *642dismissed the action, and (b) to restore the action to active status.

Ordered that the order dated April 22, 2003, is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, upon reargument, the motion is granted, the order dated January 14, 2003, and so much of the order dated November 11,1999, as dismissed the action are vacated, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for further proceedings consistent herewith.

The Supreme Court marked this action off its active calendar on April 26, 1995. By order dated November 11, 1999, the Supreme Court, sua sponte, dismissed the action pursuant to CPLR 3404. The plaintiffs moved, on notice, to vacate the order dated November 11, 1999, and to restore the action to active status based upon this Court’s decision and order in *Lopez v Imperial Delivery Serv.*(282 AD2d 190 [2001]; *(see Nedell v Sprigman,*227 AD2d 163 [1996]; *see also*CPLR 2221 [a]; 5701 [a] [2]). The Supreme Court denied the motion and, upon reargument, adhered to its original determination.

It is undisputed that no note of issue placing this action on the trial calendar was ever filed, and the action was in discovery at the time it was marked off. Thus, the Supreme Court erroneously dismissed the action pursuant to CPLR 3404 *(see Toussaint v Divine Bros. Co.,*304 AD2d 654 [2003]; *Mo Wan Lam v Dai Sing Corp.,*301 AD2d 581 [2003]; *Georgetown Mews Owners Corp. v Campus Assoc.,*283 AD2d 608 [2001]; *Lopez v Imperial Delivery Serv., supra).*Accordingly, the motion to restore the action should have been granted.

In their motion for leave to reargue, the plaintiffs also sought a determination of a prior motion to strike the defendant’s answer which was pending when the action was dismissed. Since the dismissal is vacated and the action restored, that motion can now be decided on the merits. Altman, J.P., Krausman, Goldstein and Mastro, JJ., concur.
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Sherilyn Rose Angulo, Appellant

No. 06

- 20

- 00016

- CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee Appeal from the 7th District Court of Smith County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 007

- 1547

- 18 ).
Memorandum Opinion delivered by Justice Stevens, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice Burgess participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of thi s date, we find that the appellant ’ s appeal should be

dismissed as moot . Therefore, we dismiss the appeal as moot

.
We note that the appellant, Sherilyn Rose Angulo, has adequately indicated h er inability

to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED APRIL 16, 2020
BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III
CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
Exhibit 31.1

I, John Harkola, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this  quarterly  report on Form 10-QSB of RDC  International,
Inc.

2. Based on my  knowledge,  this  quarterly  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 quarterly
report.

3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information  included in this quarterly  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 quarterly report.

4.  The  registrant's  other  certifying  officers  and  I are  responsible  for
establishing and maintaining  disclosure  controls and procedures (as defined in
exchange act rules 13a-14 and 15d- 14) for the registrant and have:

     A) designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 quarterly report is being prepared;
     B) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's  disclosure controls and
procedures  as of a date  within  90  days  prior  to the  filing  date  of this
quarterly report (the "evaluation date"); and
     C)  presented  in  this  quarterly   report  our   conclusions   about  the
effectiveness of the disclosure  controls and procedures based on our evaluation
as of the evaluation date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
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  in the design or  operation  of internal
controls  which  could  adversely  affect  the  registrant's  ability to record,
process,  summarize  and  report  financial  data  and have  identified  for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; 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.

6. The  registrant's  other  certifying  officers  and I have  indicated in this
quarterly  report  whether or not there  were  significant  changes in  internal
controls or in other factors that could  significantly  affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent  evaluation,  including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: August 14, 2003

/s/ John Harkola
John Harkola
Chief Executive Officer (or equivalent)
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    Exhibit 11.1

                 GT INTERACTIVE SOFTWARE CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                   COMPUTATION OF PRO FORMA EARNINGS PER SHARE
                      (in thousands, except per share data)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                    For the Year
                                                                       Ended
                                                                    December 31,
                                                                        1995
                                                                      -------
<S>                                                                   <C>
Pro forma net income                                                  $18,628
Pro forma weighted average shares outstanding:                        =======
    Actual                                                             59,305
    Dilutive impact of shares issued during the period and treated
    as being outstanding throughout the periods presented               1,777
                                                                      -------
                                                                       61,082
                                                                      -------
Pro forma diluted net income per share                                $  0.30
</TABLE>                                                              =======
Yayi International Inc.: Exhibit 10.3 - Prepared by newsfilecorp.com





Exhibit 10.3

English Translation of Supplemental Employment
Agreement 

Effective as of June
1, 2010, Tianjin Yayi Industrial Co., Ltd. (the "Company") hereby agrees to pay
the undersigned an annual salary of RMB 510,000 (pre tax) which
will be paid on a monthly basis. As a result, the monthly salary is RMB 42,500.
On the 18th day of each month, the Company will pay the salary for
the month before. If such date falls into a national holiday, such payment shall be
made on the first working date after such holiday. 

Based on annual review, the
Company may adjust the compensation for the undersigned from time to time upon the
approval of the Board of Directors of Yayi International Inc. 

	/s/ Li Liu                  
    	Tianjin Yayi
    Industrial Co., Ltd. 
	Li Liu	 (Seal)
Order entered October 3 , 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 13 - 01348 - CV IN RE SOUTHERN FOODS GROUP, LLC AND DEAN TRANSPORTAT ION, INC., Relators On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3

Dallas County, Texas Tri al Court Cause No. CC - 12 - 07015 - C



### O RDER The Court has before it relators’ petition for writ of mandamus

. The Court requests that real party in interest and respondent file any responses to the petition by October 14, 2013.

/s/ DAVID BRIDGES JUSTICE
EXHIBIT 99



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Thomas Bowers, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Enviro-Energy Corporation (the Registrant) do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



1.

This Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Registrant for the fiscal period ended March 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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 Registrant.

Date:  May 20, 2003

/s/ Thomas Bowers

Thomas Bowers

Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7490

ANTONIO DONOTEA HARRELL, Petitioner - Appellant, versus EUGENE M. NUTH, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (CA-98- 858-AMD) Submitted: January 7, 1999 Decided: January 20, 1999 Before WIDENER, MURNAGHAN, and ERVIN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Antonio Donotea Harrell, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Regina Hollins Lewis, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* Although one of the district court’s orders is marked as “filed” on August 17, 1998, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on August 18, 1998. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the judgment or order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986). 2 PER CURIAM: Antonio Donotea Harrell seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998), and his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and findno reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Harrell v. Nuth , No. CA-98-858-AMD (D. Md. Aug. 18 & Sept. 3, 1998). * We also deny Harrell’s motion for the appointment of counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED