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

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6035 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 6035

   To criminalize stalking using an unauthorized geotracking device.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 24, 2023

                Mrs. Sykes introduced the following bill

                            October 25, 2023

               Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To criminalize stalking using an unauthorized geotracking device.

    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 ``Stop Electronic Stalking Act''.

SEC. 2. STALKING PENALTY.

    Section 2261A of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) by striking ``Whoever'' and inserting ``(a) In 
        General.--Whoever'';
            (2) by inserting after ``uses the mail,'' the following: 
        ``uses an unauthorized geotracking device''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following:
    ``(b) Definitions.--In this section:
            ``(1) The term `geotracking device' means an electronic or 
        mechanical device that permits a person to remotely determine 
        or track the position and movement of another person.
            ``(2) The term `unauthorized' means, with respect to a 
        geotracking device, that the person on whom the geotracking 
        device is being used has not consented to such use or otherwise 
        revoked consent to such use.''.
                                 <all>
```
Armando A. RIVAS, Appellant, v. THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, Bayview Loan Servicing LLP, and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Appellees.

No. 4D17-852

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[February 22, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
#### Roy WALKER *v.*STATE of Arkansas

5350

429 S. W. 2d 121

Opinion delivered June 3, 1968

[Rehearing denied July 15, 1968.]

*Oliver L. Adams,*for appellant.

*Joe Purcell,*Attorney General; *Don Langston,*Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

George Rose Smith, Justice.

Roy Walker was convicted of involuntary manslaughter and sentenced to imprisonment for three years. According to the State’s proof, Walker was driving a truck on a highway in or near Eureka Springs at such a high speed that he lost *1151control of the vehicle and struck and killed Otto Miller, a pedestrian. The information charged that Walker was intoxicated at the- time. For reversal Walker contends that the court erred in allowing the prosecution to introduce evidence of a blood test that showed Walker to have been intoxicated.

After the accident Walker, who was injured, was taken by someone to a hospital in Eureka Springs, where he was treated as an outpatient. There K-ichard Stall-man, a laboratory technician, took a sample of Walker’s blood without having asked his permission and sent it to a pathologist in Fayetteville for analysis. The pathologist testified that the sample contained .140 percent of alcohol when taken and that the percentage would probably have been higher an hour earlier, when the accident occurred.

The appellant, citing *Schmerber*v. *California,*384 U. S. 757 (1966), and other cases, insists that the taking of the blood sample amounted to such an unreasonable search and seizure as to be prohibited by the federal and state constitutions. It does not appear, however, that Stellman acted either at the direction of the police or by prearrangement with them. The seareh-and-seizure clauses are restraints upon the government and its agents, not upon private individuals. *People*v. *Potter,*Cal. App., 49 Cal. Rptr. 892 (1966); *State*v. *Brown,*Mo., 391 S. W. 2d 903 (1965); *State*v. *Olsen,*Ore., 317 P. 2d 938 (1957). Hence the proof does not establish a denial of Walker’s constitutional rights.

Complaint is also made of the court’s refusal to give an instruction informing the jury that the decedent was under a duty to keep a proper lookout. We doubt the applicability of such a civil standard to a criminal case, but in any event the point was not included in the motion for a new trial and so is not available to the appellant in this court. *Dokes*v. *State,*241 Ark. 720, 409 S. W. 2d 827 (1966).

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 599 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

<DOC>
118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 599

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            February 1, 2024

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 3500 West 6th Street, Suite 103 in Los Angeles, California, as the 
                  ``Dosan Ahn Chang Ho Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. DOSAN AHN CHANG HO POST OFFICE REDESIGNATION.

    (a) Redesignation.--Section 1 of Public Law 108-239 is amended by 
striking ``3751 West 6th Street in Los Angeles, California'' and 
inserting ``3500 West 6th Street, Suite 103 in Los Angeles, 
California''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in section 1 of Public Law 108-239 as amended by subsection (a) shall 
be deemed to be a reference to the ``Dosan Ahn Chang Ho Post Office''.

            Passed the House of Representatives January 31, 2024.

            Attest:

                                             KEVIN F. MCCUMBER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Charles WILKINS, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-4486

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 16, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Granted.
#### PALMETTO PHARMACEUTICALS LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant v. ASTRAZENECA PHARMACEUTICALS LP, Defendant-Cross-Appellant

2016-1455

2016-1501

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

December 9, 2016

*789John Paul Isacson, Perkins Coie, LLP, Washington, DC, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Also represented by Colin Gene Sandercock; David J. Harth, David R. Pekarek Krohn, John Singleton Skilton, Madison, WI; Dan L. Bagatell, Hanover, NH.

Christopher Neil Sipes, Covington *&*Burling LLP, Washington, DC, argued for defendant-cross-appellant. Also represented by Stephen Pierce Anthony, Isaac Chaim Belfer, Robert Jason Fowler.

(Moore, Wallaeh, and Chen, Circuit Judges).

JUDGMENT

Per Curiam

This Cause having been heard and considered, it is Ordered and Adjudged:

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
EXHIBIT 21.1

                                  SUBSIDIARIES


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                              State/Country of
Name                                           Incorporation       % Ownership
- ------------------------------------------    ----------------   ---------------
<S>                                           <C>                <C>

Flanders/CSC Corporation                      North Carolina        100.00%

Air Seal Filter Housings, Inc.                Texas                 100.00%

Precisionaire, Inc.                           Florida               100.00%

Flanders International Pte, Ltd.              Singapore             100.00%

Flanders Filters, Inc.                        North Carolina         98.86%

Airseal West, Inc.                            Utah                  100.00%

Flanders Airia Technologies, Inc.             North Carolina        100.00%

GFI, Inc.                                     Utah                  100.00%

S.R.I., Inc.                                  Utah                  100.00%

Flanders/Precisionaire Corp.                  North Carolina        100.00%

Flanders Realty Corp.                         North Carolina        100.00%

Flanders Airpure Products Company, LLC        North Carolina        100.00%(1)

Flanders Airia Technologies International     England               100.00%(2)
  Ltd.

Flanders Airpure Filter Sales and             North Carolina        100.00%
  Service, Inc.

Sierra Ridge Filter Corporation               California            100.00%

Eco-Air Products, Inc.                        California            100.00%

Industrias Seco de Tijuana, C.C.S.A. de C.V.  Mexico                100.00%(3)

Superior Die-Cutting, Inc.                    Kentucky                0.00%(4)

</TABLE>

_____________________

(1) 63% owned by Flanders Filters, Inc., 37% by the Company.
(2) Owned by Flanders Airia Technologies, Inc.
(3) Owned by Eco-Air Products, Inc.
(4) 100% owned by Robert R. Amerson and Steven K. Clark, who jointly own
    approximately 43% of the Company.
Issiac SANDERS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-3626

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed April 3, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Sarit J. ASSIL, n/k/a Sarit Levy, Appellant, v. DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS, as Trustee FOR RESIDENTIAL ACCREDIT LOANS, INC., MORTGAGE ASSET-BACKED PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES SERIES 2005-QO1, AURORA LOAN SERVICES, LLC, Appellees.

No. 4D17-2070

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[March 15, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
ERNST & YOUNG                                           Phone: 972-3-6232525
                                                         Fax: 972-3-5622555

                                                         Kost Forer & Gabbay
                                                         3 Aminadav St.
                                                         Tel-Aviv 61575, Israel


Exhibit 14.1

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration  Statements on:
(a) Form S-8 (333-94995)  pertaining to the 1996 CSI Stock Option Plan, the 1999
Section 3(i) Share Option Plan,  the 1999 Employee  Stock  Purchase Plan and the
1999  Non-Employee  Directors Stock Option Plan of Commtouch  Software Ltd.; (b)
Form F-3  (333-89773)  pertaining to the resale of 2,052,051  ordinary shares of
Commtouch  Software Ltd. by Vulcan Ventures  Incorporated,  InfoSpace  (formerly
"Go2Net,  Inc.")  and  Microsoft  Corporation  and  a  warrant  exercisable  for
1,136,000 ordinary shares of Commtouch Software Ltd. by InfoSpace;  (c) Form F-3
(333-46192)  pertaining  to the sale by Commtouch  Software Ltd. of 4,000,000 of
its ordinary  shares;  (d) Form S-8 (333-65532)  pertaining to the 1999 Employee
Stock Purchase Plan, the 1999  Non-Employee  Directors Stock Option Plan and the
Wingra  Technologies,  LLC 1998  Unit  Option  Plan;  (e)  Form F-3  (333-68248)
pertaining to the resale of 1,406,612 ordinary shares of Commtouch Software Ltd.
by  investors  in Wingra;  (f) Form F-3  (333-88248)  pertaining  to the sale by
Commtouch  Software  Ltd.  of  7,095,886  of its  ordinary  shares  (g) Form F-3
(333-109837)  pertaining to the sale by Commtouch  Software Ltd. of 8,793,564 of
its  ordinary  shares  (h)  Form  F-3  (333-111731)  pertaining  to the  sale by
Commtouch  Software  Ltd.  Of  11,345,358  of its  ordinary  shares (i) Form F-3
(333-111734)  pertaining to the sale by Commtouch  Software Ltd. of 4,162,479 of
its ordinary  shares,  of our report dated February 20, 2004 with respect to the
consolidated  financial  statements  and  schedule of  Commtouch  Software  Ltd.
included  in this  Annual  Report on Form 20-F for the year ended  December  31,
2003.






Tel-Aviv, Israel                             KOST FORER GABBAY & KASIERER
June 18, 2004                                A Member of Ernst & Young Global
# **Exhibit 31.01**

## ** **

## **Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

I, Michael H. Carrel, certify that:

1.   I havereviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Zamba Corporation;

2.   Based onmy knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.   Based onmy knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

4.   Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I, are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:

a)Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and

c)Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.   Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

a)All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

b)Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls overfinancial reporting.

 
| Date:  | November 15, 2004                |
|--------|---------------------------------------|
|   | /s/ Michael H. Carrel                 |
|   | President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
**Exhibit 32**

** **

**Consent of AMC Mining Consultants**

 

We consent to the inclusion in this annualreport on Form 40-F of New Gold Inc., which is being filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, of referencesto our name in connection with, and to the use of information derived from, the technical report entitled “NI 43-101 TechnicalReport Feasibility Study of the Rainy River Project, Ontario, Canada”, dated February 14, 2014, included in the Annual InformationForm of New Gold Inc. for the financial year ended December 31, 2014 and we consent to the incorporation by reference of such informationin the registration statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-160500) of New Gold Inc.

 

Dated this 27th day of March, 2015

 

**AMC Mining Consultants**

 

*/s/ Bert Smith *

By: 	Bert Smith

Title	General Manager/Principal Mining Engineer
<PAGE>

                            EAGLE HARDWARE & GARDEN, INC.
                  COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE - EXHIBIT 11.1
                                    (IN THOUSANDS)




                                                (UNAUDITED)
                                              13 WEEKS ENDED
                                       --------------------------
                                           MAY 2,      APRIL 26,
                                           1997          1996
                                       ------------  ------------

Net income as reported                     $4,588         $2,964
                                        ------------  ------------
                                        ------------  ------------


Weighted average number of
 common shares outstanding                 28,896         22,903

Add (where dilutive):
  Assumed exercise of those
  options that are common stock
  equivalents net of treasury
  shares deemed to have been
  repurchased                                 436            334
                                        ------------  ------------

Weighted average number of
 common and common equivalent
 shares outstanding, used for
 computation of net income per share       29,332         23,237
                                        ------------  ------------
                                        ------------  ------------
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            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 Tasker  Capital  Corp.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended  December 31, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, Robert Appleby, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. 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 and 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.

         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.

April 15, 2005                           /s/ Robert Appleby
                                         ------------------------------------
                                         Robert Appleby
                                         Chief Executive Officer
Robert COLLIER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-0214

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 3, 2018

William Mallory Kent of Kent & McFarland, Jacksonville, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED .

Osterhaus, Winokur, and M.K. Thomas, JJ., concur.
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 201 3 - 0459 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 201 3 -NM - 044 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: **Next Step:** FRAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, lis t latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter togeth er. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR - M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree w ith because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch Man ager**  **Date**
#### Bell *v.*Tallman.

Opinion delivered April 20, 1901.

Appeal — Questions Considered. — Where a chancery cause was decided on a demurrer to the complaint, the supreme court on appeal will not' go into the merits, although testimony was taken and presented in the transcript.

Appeal from Prairie Circuit Court in Chancery.

James S. Thomas, Judge.

*Thos. G. Trimble*and *J. E.*Gatewood, for appllants.

The complaint stated a cause of action and equity had jurisdiction thereof. 19 Ark. 139; 22 Ark. 103; 24 Ark. 431; 32 Ark. 478; 2 Story, Eq. § 700. It was error to sustain the demurrer.

*W. E. Atkinson,*for appellees.

The court correctly sustained the demurrer. The taxation being valid, appellants cannot recover in equity and aquire a title because of irregularity in the assessment or sale, without first tendering to the purchaser, or those claiming under him, the taxes, penalties and costs. 39 Ark. 263.

' 'Bunn, C. J.

This is a bill in chancery in the Prairie circuit court by the appellant to establish a lost certificate of entry of the southwest quarter of section 33, in. township 1 south of range 6 *245west, in Prairie county, issued to one Herr and by him transferred to one Harvel, through which, by successive transfers, appellants claim title, and also to set aside a tax title under which appellees claim the same land, and to quiet appellant’s title thereto. The bill sets up the successive links in appellant’s chain of title, and the answer sets up a tax sale and lost certificate thereof, whereby the appellants and those under whom they claim were divested of the title to said property, and concludes with a general demurrer to the complaint.

On the hearing, the chancellor considered the demurrer to the complaint only, and sustained the same, and dismissed the bill, although testimony was taken and presented in the transcript upon the whole case. But, having decided the cases upon the demurrer, the inquiry into the merits on the testimony was not gone into; and we are thus left to review the action of the chancellor on the demurrer only. Upon its face, and standing alone, it is our opinion that the complaint is good upon demurrer, and the same should have been overruled, and the case decided upon its merits.

The judgment and decree is reversed, and the cause is remanded, with directions to overrule the demurrer and to proceed with the cause not inconsistently with this opinion.
Steven Thor HATTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D16-3404

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[April 12, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.