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

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4467 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4467

To accelerate the income tax benefits for charitable cash contributions 
for the relief of victims of the January 12, 2010, earthquake in Haiti.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 19, 2010

 Mr. Meek of Florida (for himself, Mr. Hall of New York, Mr. Rush, Ms. 
Waters, Mr. Johnson of Georgia, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, Mr. McMahon, Ms. Lee 
  of California, Mr. Mack, Mr. Honda, Mr. Engel, Ms. Corrine Brown of 
    Florida, Ms. Wasserman Schultz, and Mr. Capuano) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To accelerate the income tax benefits for charitable cash contributions 
for the relief of victims of the January 12, 2010, earthquake in Haiti.

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

SECTION 1. ACCELERATION OF INCOME TAX BENEFITS FOR CHARITABLE CASH 
              CONTRIBUTIONS FOR RELIEF OF HAITIAN EARTHQUAKE VICTIMS.

    (a) In General.--For purposes of section 170 of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986, a taxpayer may treat any contribution described 
in subsection (b) made during January or February 2010 as if such 
contribution was made on December 31, 2009, and not in January or 
February 2010.
    (b) Contribution Described.--A contribution is described in this 
subsection if such contribution is a cash contribution made for the 
relief of victims in areas affected by the January 12, 2010, earthquake 
in Haiti for which a charitable contribution deduction is allowable 
under section 170 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
                                 <all>
```
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

February 5, 2020

No. 04-20-00020-CR

IN RE STATE OF TEXAS, ex. rel. Todd A. “Tadeo” Durden, County Attorney

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

ORDER

Sitting: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Irene Rios, Justice

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

On January 27, 2020, this court ordered Kinney County to pay the costs for preparing the 

reporter’s record no later than February 7, 2020, subject to this court later determining whether 

costs should otherwise be taxed on the final disposition of this original proceeding. We also 

ordered that the reporter’s record be filed no later than ten days after the costs were paid.

On February 3, 2020, the court reporter filed a Notification of Late Record stating she 

received payment for the record on February 3, 2020, and she asked for thirty days in which to 

file the record. The request is granted and the record is due no later than March 3, 2020.

Relator is reminded that its amended petition for writ of mandamus, with all appropriate 

citations to the record, is due no later than fifteen days from the date the reporter’s record is 

filed. If relator fails to timely file its amended petition for writ of mandamus, this original 

proceeding will be dismissed for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.9, 42.3.

It is so ORDERED on February 5, 2020. 

 PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO: _________________________

 MICHAEL A. CRUZ,

 Clerk of Court

1 This proceeding arises out of The State of Texas v. Mark Anthony Gonzalez; Cause No. 10041CR, and twenty-one 

other cases, pending in the County Court, Kinney County, Texas. The Honorable Sid L. Harle signed the order at 

issue in this original proceeding.
<PAGE>
                  EXHIBIT 23.2 CONSENT OF BAIRD KURTZ & DOBSON 

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS      

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the January 7, 1997 
Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-19369) of our report, dated 
February 28, 1997, which appears in the annual report on Form 10-KSB of Rocky 
Mountain Internet, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 1996.

/s/BAIRD, KURTZ & DOBSON

Denver, Colorado
April 17, 1997

                                       7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION
CHRISTOPHER FOSTER, et al., é Case No. 1:18-cv-247
Plaintiffs, :
Judge Timothy S. Black
vs.
OHIO DEPARTMENT OF
REHABILITATION AND

CORRECTIONS, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This civil case is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Western Division to
United States Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman. Pursuant to such reference, the
Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleading filed with this Court and, on May 10, 2018,
submitted a Report and Recommendation, recommending that Plaintiff's be denied leave
to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 2). Plaintiff filed objections to the Report and

Recommendation on May 24, 2018. (Doc. 3).!

' Plaintiff fails to provide “specific written objections” to the Report and Recommendation. Fed.
R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) (emphasis added). “The filing of objections provides the district court with
the opportunity to consider the specific contentions of the parties and to correct any errors
immediately.” United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 950 (6th Cir. 1981) (emphasis added).
“A party’s objections are not sufficiently specific if they merely restate the claims made in the
initial petition, “disput[e] the correctness’ of a report and recommendation without specifying the
findings purportedly in error, or simply ‘object[ ] to the report and recommendation and refer[ ]
to several of the issues in the case.” Bradley v. United States, No. 18-1444, 2018 WL 5084806,
at *3 (6th Cir. Sept. 17, 2018) (quoting Miller v. Currie, 50 F.3d 373, 380 (6th Cir. 1995)). ~
Here, Plaintiff merely restates the argument set forth in his complaint and fails to articulate a
specific objection. The Court finds the Magistrate Judge’s recommendations thorough and
accurate, and, accordingly, Plaintiff’s objections are overruled.


As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), the Court has
reviewed the comprehensive findings of the Magistrate Judge and considered de novo all
of the filings in this matter. Upon consideration of the foregoing, the Court determines
that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 2) should be, and is hereby, adopted in its
entirety. Accordingly:

1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 2) is ADOPTED;

2: Within thirty (30) days of this Order, Plaintiff SHALL pay the full $400
fee ($350 filing fee plus $50 administrative fee) required to commence this
action;

Os Plaintiff SHALL take notice that failure to pay the full $400 fee within
thirty days will result in the dismissal of his action; and

4. This case is DISMISSED with prejudice, and the Clerk shall enter
judgment accordingly, whereupon this case shall be TERMINATED
on the docket of this Court; and

5; Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), the Court certifies that an appeal
of this Order would not be taken in good faith.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: 5 ih TintctigZ2 Chk

Timothy S-Black
United States District Judge
#### ARKANSAS STATE HOSPITAL *v.*ESTATE OF GRACE BROOKS CULVER, An Incompetent

5-4543

426 S. W. 2d 374

Opinion delivered April 15, 1968

*Douglas Bradley,*for appellant.

*George H. Steimel,*for appellee.

George Rose Smith, Justice.

Since 1947 Grace Brooks Culver, a mentally incompetent woman, has been almost continuously confined to the State Hospital. In 1966 Mrs. Culver inherited $12,388.03, which was paid to her guardian. The State Hospital then filed a claim in the probate court against Mrs. Culver’s estate for $16,268.74, which is shown to be the sum due the State Hospital for her maintenance and treatment during the years of her confinement, nothing having ever been paid upon the account. This appeal is from a probate court order allowing the claim for three years only, in the amount of $5,280.

Counsel for the guardian concede, with candor, that there is no applicable statute of limitations with respect to the State Hospital’s assertion of a claim of this kind. *Cruce*v. *Ark. State Hospital,*241 Ark. 680, 409 S. *W.*2d 342 (1966); *Alcorn*v. *Ark. State Hospital,*236 Ark. 665, 367 S. W. 2d 737 (1963). In fact, counsel’s only argument against a reversal is the forlorn suggestion *590that the court’s order is not a final judgment, for the reason that the allowance of part of the State Hospital’s claim was not accompanied by an express disallowance of the rest of it. Such a contention does not deserve serious discussion.

Reversed and remanded for the entry of an order allowing the claim.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
THE ACCOMPANYING CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           3,489
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   45,436
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,650
<INVENTORY>                                     49,323
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               103,414
<PP&E>                                          40,009
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,339
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 446,775
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           45,206
<BONDS>                                        271,508
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     108,828
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   446,775
<SALES>                                        112,598
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               112,598
<CGS>                                           75,974
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   98,682
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (367)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              12,729
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,554
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,737
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (183)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (183)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
Exhibit 21
 SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT
 Name of Subsidiary
    
    Jurisdiction of OrganizationAffordable Property Holdings, LLC
    
    MichiganCAPREIT Tera Venture, LLC
    
    MarylandFM Sponsor I, LLC
    
    MarylandMMA Financial Bond Warehousing, LLC
    
    MarylandMMA Financial Warehousing, LLC
    
    MarylandMMA Advisory Services (formerly Midland Advisory Services, Inc.)
    
    MichiganMMA Capital Corporation
    
    MichiganMMA Equity Corporation1
    
    FloridaMMA Financial Holdings, Inc. (formerly Midland Financial
Holdings, Inc.)
    
    FloridaMMA Middle Tier I, LP
    
    DelawareMMA Mortgage Investment Corporation
    
    FloridaMidland Realty Investment Corporation
    
    FloridaMMA Special Limited Partner, Inc.
    
    FloridaMMA Special Partners Corp.
    
    DelawareMMA Credit Enhancement I, LLC
    
    MarylandMMA Servicing, LLC
    
    MarylandMMACap, LLC
    
    DelawareMunicipal Mortgage Investments II, LLC
    
    MarylandMunicipal Mortgage Investments III, LLC
    
    MarylandMunicipal Mortgage Investments IV, LLC
    
    MarylandMunicipal Mortgage Investments, LLC
    
    MarylandMuniMae Investment Services Corporation
    
    MarylandMMA Construction Finance, LLC (formerly MuniMae Construction
Finance, LLC)
    
    MarylandMMA Financial Equity I, LLC
    
    MarylandMMA Financial Equity II, LLC
    
    MarylandMMA Financial Equity III, LLC
    
    MarylandMMA Financial Equity IV, LLC
    
    MarylandMMA Financial Equity V, LLC
    
    MarylandMMA Financial Equity Ventures, LLC
    
    MarylandMMA Financial, LLC (formerly MuniMae Midland, LLC)
    
    MarylandMuniMae Portfolio Services, LLC
    
    MarylandMuniMae Structured Finance, LLC
    
    Maryland
 
 1
    
    This company controls 100 consolidated wholly-owned
subsidiaries engaged in the syndication of low-income housing tax credits
equity investments, including asset management services, which operate in
the United States.




---



##### 



Name of Subsidiary
    
    Jurisdiction of OrganizationMMA Financial Swap Party I, LLC
    
    MarylandMuniMae TE Bond Subsidiary, LLC
    
    MarylandMunimae TEI Holdings, LLC
    
    MarylandTE Bond Holder Limited Partnership
    
    MarylandWhitehawk Capital Fund IV, LLC
    
    MarylandWhitehawk Capital, LLC
    
    DelawareMMA Financial TC Corp. 2
    
    DelawareMMA Financial BFG Investments, LLC
    
    DelawareMMA Financial BFGLP, LLC
    
    MarylandMMA Financial BFRP, Inc.
    
    DelawareMMA Financial CDD Sponsor, LLC
    
    MarylandMMA Financial CDE Investor, LLC
    
    MarylandMMA Financial Community Investment, LLC
    
    MarylandMFH Financial Trust I
    
    DelawareWest Cedar Acquisitions LLC
    
    DelawareAcquisitions Investments Corp.
    
    MassachusettsBF Institutional Tax Credits Acquisitions Limited Partner
    
    MassachusettsLend Lease MSR Corp.
    
    Delaware
 
 2
    
    This company controls 979 consolidated wholly-owned
subsidiaries engaged in the syndication of low-income housing tax credits
equity investments, including asset management services, which operate in the
United States.
Molecular Weight Analysis for PMN of -DI adduct

Summary: the sample -DI adduct was analyzed by GPC and its molecular weight information was obtained.

Background: GPC was used to analyze molecular weight of -DI adduct from Madison Heights for regulatory purpose.

Results: The sample was run on Sep. 20, 2014. Calculated molecular weights (relative to polystyrene standards) and distributions are given in 

Table 1. GPC chromatogram is shown in Figure 1 which shows that only some higher molecular weight polymers were generated and eluted 

between - minutes to - minutes. To calculate molecular weights of these new molecules, the GPC chromatogram is integrated as Figure 2. 

According to the attached slice table, there are no new molecules below 1000 Da and 500 Da.

Slice table: see 1409043 IPDI.xlex

Figure 1. GPC chromatograms of -DI adduct and -.

-

Figure 2. Integrated GPC chromatogram of -DI adduct

Table 1. Molecular weights and distributions 

-DI adduct Injection #

Retention Time

(min)

Mn

(Da)

Mw

(Da)

MP

(Da)

Mz

(Da)

Polydispersity

(Mw/Mn)

1 - - - - - -

2 - - - - - -

Average - - - - - -

Calibration Curve (polystyrene standards)

-

-
Experiment:

Sample preparation: about 2.5 mg sample was weighed and dissolved in 4 ml mobile phase. The sample solution was kept at room temperature 

overnight. The insoluble components were filtered out by 0.45 PTFE filters.

Instrument: 

Waters 717 HPLC autosampler

Waters 515 pump

Column oven: CTO-10AC from Shimadzu 

Refractive index detector: RID-6A from Shimadzu 

Software: Empower from Waters

Column set:

Manufacturer: Agilent Co.

Columns: two oligomer columns + guard

Running conditions:

Mobile phase: stabilized THF

Column temperature: 35C

Flow rate: 1ml/min

Run time: 25 minutes

# of injections: 2

Injection volume: 100 microliter

Sample concentration: - mg/ml

Standards: GPC polystyrene standards from Agilent

Please let me know if you have questions. Thanks.

Lei
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4622 

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide for enhanced 

penalties for certain Federal officials who are alien smugglers, and for 

other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 9, 2010 

Mr. PATRICK J. MURPHY of Pennsylvania (for himself and Mrs. KIRKPATRICK

of Arizona) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide 

for enhanced penalties for certain Federal officials who 

are alien smugglers, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Secure Borders Act 

5 of 2010’’. 

6 SEC. 2. ENHANCED PENALTIES FOR CERTAIN FEDERAL OF7 FICIALS WHO ARE ALIEN SMUGGLERS. 

8 Section 274(a)(1)(B) of the Immigration and Nation9 ality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324(a)(1)(B)) is amended— 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4622 IH

1 (1) in clause (iii), by striking the ‘‘and’’ at the 

2 end; 

3 (2) in clause (iv), by striking the period at the 

4 end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

5 (3) by adding at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘(v) in the case of a violation of subpara7 graph (A) (i), (ii), (iii), (iv), or (v), if the per8 son who commits the violation is an officer or 

9 employee of a Federal law enforcement agency 

10 (including the Coast Guard of the United 

11 States) and, in committing the violation, that 

12 person acts under the color of his or her au13 thority to enforce Federal law, be fined under 

14 title 18, United States Code, imprisoned not 

15 more than 20 years, or both.’’. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
##### 



Exhibit 32.02 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 Silicon Image, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I, Robert G. Gargus, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify to the
best of my knowledge, 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) 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 result of operations of the Company
for the periods presented therein. /s/ Robert G. GargusRobert G. GargusChief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)March 15, 2005 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the
Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
        THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL  INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED  BALANCE  SHEET  AS OF  DECEMBER  31,  1997  AND  THE  CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS  OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR ENDED  DECEMBER  31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         26,773
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  9,079
<ALLOWANCES>                                   180
<INVENTORY>                                    3,465
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               41,126
<PP&E>                                         6,025
<DEPRECIATION>                                 4,528
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 42,791
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          5,374
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       9
<OTHER-SE>                                     37,408
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   42,791
<SALES>                                        38,245
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               38,286
<CGS>                                          14,426
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  14,426
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                8,476
<INCOME-TAX>                                   3,174
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            5,302
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   5,302
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0.58
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.55
        

</TABLE>
From: "Frey, Nathan J." <Nathan_J._Frey@omb.eop.gov>

To: Kevin Culligan/DC/USEPA/US@EPA Cc: Nicole Owens/DC/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 03/12/2012 11:18 AM Subject: Summary of Interagency Comments under EO 12866/13563 -- Standards of Performance for

Greenhouse Gas Emissions for New Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units 

### Attached please find a summary of interagency comments under EO 12866/13563 on the EPA draft RIA for the proposed rule entitled, Standards of Performance for Greenhouse Gas Emission s for New Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units RIN 2060 -AQ91. Thank you and please let me know if you have any questions.
EO 12866 13563 Interagency Comments1 EGU GHG NSPS RIA Combined.docx
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 488 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 488

     To provide for related procedures concerning the articles of 
 impeachment against Donald John Trump, President of the United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 31, 2020

Mr. McConnell submitted the following resolution; which was considered 
                             and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
     To provide for related procedures concerning the articles of 
 impeachment against Donald John Trump, President of the United States.

    Resolved, That the record in this case shall be closed, and no 
motion with respect to reopening the record shall be in order for the 
duration of these proceedings.
    The Senate shall proceed to final arguments as provided in the 
impeachment rules, waiving the two person rule contained in Rule XXII 
of the Rules of Procedure and Practice in the Senate When Sitting on 
Impeachment Trials. Such arguments shall begin at 11:00am on Monday, 
February 3, 2020, and not exceed four hours, and be equally divided 
between the House and the President to be used as under the Rules of 
Impeachment.
    At the conclusion of the final arguments by the House and the 
President, the court of impeachment shall stand adjourned until 4:00pm 
on Wednesday, February 5, 2020, at which time the Senate, without 
intervening action or debate shall vote on the Articles of Impeachment.
                                 <all>
```