alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>
                                              
<ARTICLE>                                          5
<CIK>                                              0001005335
<NAME>                   SMITH BARNEY PRINCIPAL PLUS FUTURES FUND L.P. II
                                                    
<S>                                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                      3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                     JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                       MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                                        10,203,463
<SECURITIES>                                                  13,383,355
<RECEIVABLES>                                                     80,484
<ALLOWANCES>                                                           0
<INVENTORY>                                                            0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                              23,667,302
<PP&E>                                                                 0
<DEPRECIATION>                                                         0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                23,667,302
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                            843,488
<BONDS>                                                                0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                                            0
<COMMON>                                                               0
<OTHER-SE>                                                    22,823,814
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                  23,667,302
<SALES>                                                                0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                               1,020,489
<CGS>                                                                  0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                          0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                 308,008
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                     0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                  712,481
<INCOME-TAX>                                                           0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                    0
<DISCONTINUED>                                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                        0
<CHANGES>                                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                                     712,481
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                      35.34
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                          0
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with this Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Bridgeline Digital, Inc. (the “Company”) for the year ended September 30, 2015, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Michael Prinn, Co-Chief Executive Officer and President, and Chief Financial Officer of the Company certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:



(1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the dates presented and result of operations of the Company for the periods presented.



|Date:       January 28, 2016 |        | /s/ Michael Prinn                                                                              
|---------------------------- | ------ | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                             | Name:  | Michael Prinn                                                                                  
|                             | Title: | Co-Chief Executive Officer and President, Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)



This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

April 21, 2022

No. 04-22-00211-CV

IN RE PEOPLE'S MANAGEMENT OF TEXAS 1, LTD.

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

ORDER

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Irene Rios, Justice

On April 11, 2022, the Relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus. This court believes

a serious question concerning the mandamusrelief sought requires further consideration. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 52.8(b). The Respondent and the Real Party in Interest may file a response to the

petition in this court no later than May 6, 2022. Any such response must conform to Texas Rule

of Appellate Procedure 52.4.

It is so ORDERED on April 21, 2022.

 PER CURIAM

 ATTESTED TO: ______________________________

 MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 97-CVQ-00997-D1, styled People's Management of Texas 1, Ltd., 

successor in interest to Joe Medina, trustee v. Carlos Gutierrez, pending in the 49th Judicial District Court, Webb

County, Texas, the Honorable Joe Lopez presiding.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6782 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 6782

To reduce, from 21 years of age to 18 years of age, the minimum age at 
 which a person may obtain a handgun from a Federal firearms licensee.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 14, 2023

  Mr. Massie (for himself, Ms. Boebert, Mrs. Cammack, Mr. Clyde, Mr. 
DesJarlais, Mr. Duncan, Mr. Gosar, Ms. Greene of Georgia, Ms. Hageman, 
Mr. LaMalfa, Mr. Mooney, Mr. Norman, Mr. Perry, and Mr. Roy) introduced 
    the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the 
                               Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To reduce, from 21 years of age to 18 years of age, the minimum age at 
 which a person may obtain a handgun from a Federal firearms licensee.

    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 ``Second Amendment For Every 
Registrable Voter Act'' or the ``SAFER Voter Act''.

SEC. 2. MINIMUM AGE FOR OBTAINING A HANDGUN FROM A FEDERAL FIREARMS 
              LICENSEE.

    (a) In General.--Section 922(b)(1) of title 18, United States Code, 
is amended by striking ``, and, if the firearm, or ammunition is other 
than a shotgun or rifle, or ammunition for a shotgun or rifle, to any 
individual who the licensee knows or has reasonable cause to believe is 
less than twenty-one years of age''.
    (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 922(c)(1) of such title is 
amended by striking ``, in the case of any firearm other than a shotgun 
or a rifle, I am twenty-one years or more of age, or that, in the case 
of a shotgun or a rifle,''.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6651 Reported in Senate (RS)]

<DOC>

                                                       Calendar No. 465
118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6651

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              June 4, 2024

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

                             August 1, 2024

               Reported by Mr. Peters, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 603 West 3rd Street in Necedah, Wisconsin, as the ``Sergeant Kenneth 
                   E. Murphy Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. SERGEANT KENNETH E. MURPHY POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 603 West 3rd Street in Necedah, Wisconsin, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Sergeant Kenneth E. Murphy Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Sergeant 
Kenneth E. Murphy Post Office Building''.
                                                       Calendar No. 465

118th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 6651

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 603 West 3rd Street in Necedah, Wisconsin, as the ``Sergeant Kenneth 
                   E. Murphy Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             August 1, 2024

                       Reported without amendment
```
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 780 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 780

To amend the National Labor Relations Act to require Federal contracts 
 debarment for persons who violate labor relations provisions, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                  May 9 (legislative day, May 1), 1995

   Mr. Simon introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
         referred to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the National Labor Relations Act to require Federal contracts 
 debarment for persons who violate labor relations provisions, 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 ``Federal Contractor Labor Relations 
Enforcement Act of 1995''.

SEC. 2. DEBARMENT.

    The National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 151 et seq.) is amended 
by adding at the end the following new section:

                     ``federal contracts debarment

    ``Sec. 20. (a) Any person or entity that, with a clear pattern and 
practice, violates the provisions of this Act shall be ineligible for 
all Federal contracts for a period of 3 years.
    ``(b) The Secretary of Labor shall promulgate regulations regarding 
debarment provisions and procedures. The regulations shall require that 
Federal contracting agencies shall refrain from entering into further 
contracts, or extensions or other modifications of existing contracts, 
with any person or entity described in subsection (a) during the 3-year 
period immediately following a determination by the Secretary of Labor 
that the person or entity is in violation (as described in subsection 
(a)) of this Act.
    ``(c) A debarment may be removed, or the period of debarment may be 
reduced, by the Secretary of Labor upon the submission of an 
application to the Secretary of Labor that is supported by documentary 
evidence and that sets forth appropriate reasons for the granting of 
the debarment removal or reduction, including reasons such as 
compliance with the final orders that are found to have been willfully 
violated, a bona fide change of ownership or management, or a fraud or 
misrepresentation of the charging party.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Rasheen D. FAIRLY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-16889

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 26, 2017 *

Filed July 3, 2017

Karen A. Escobar, Assistant U.S. Attorney, DOJ-USAO, Fresno, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Rasheen D. Fairly, Pro Se

Before: PAEZ, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges,

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed, R. App. P. 34(a)(2), ,

MEMORANDUM **

Federal prisoner Rasheen D. Fairly appeals pro se from the district court’s order *933denying his petition for writ of error co-rana nobis. We have jurisdiction under .28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

This court reviews de novo the district court’s denial of a coram nobis petition. *See Matus-Leva v. United States,*287 F.3d 758, 760 (9th Cir. 2002). We agree with the district court’s conclusion that it lacked jurisdiction to review the validity of Fairly’s state conviction. *See Hensley v. Municipal Court,*453 F.2d 1252, 1252 n.2 (9th Cir. 1972) (“Coram nobis lies only to challenge errors occurring in the same court.”), *rev’d on other grounds,*411 U.S. 345, 93 S.Ct. 1571, 36 L.Ed.2d 294 (1973); *see also Madigan v. Wells,*224 F.2d 577, 578 n.2 (9th Cir. 1955) (“[T]he writ can issue, if at all, only in aid of the jurisdiction of the ... court in which the conviction was had.”)

AFFIRMED.

**

 This, disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provid*933ed by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Christopher Terrell BRADLEY, Defendant-Appellant

No. 17-60047 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed August 10, 2017

Susan Spears Bradley, Esq., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Mississippi, Oxford, MS, for Plaintiff-Appellee

George Lowrey Lucas, Esq., Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Northern District of Mississippi, Oxford, MS, for Defendant-Appellant

Before BENAVIDES, SOUTHWICK, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Christopher Terrell Bradley appeals the 60-month sentence imposed following his *973guilty plea conviction for failure to register as a sex offender. The district court varied above the guidelines range of 30 to 37 months of imprisonment, citing the volume .and sometimes violent nature of Bradley’s criminal history, ’the need to afford adequate deterrence to continued criminal conduct, and the need to protect the public from further crimes. These were proper factors for the district court to consider. *See United States v. Smith,*440 F.3d 704, 708 (5th Cir. 2006). Given the significant deference that is due to a district, court’s consideration of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, *see Gall v. United States,*552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007), and the district court’s reasons for its sentencing decision, Bradley has not demonstrated that his sentence is substantively unreasonable or an abuse of discretion, *see United States v. McElwee,*646 F.3d 328, 344-45 (5th Cir. 2011).

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under *973the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jacquel SEARLES, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-11945 Non-Argument Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

(October 19, 2017)

R. Brian Tanner, U.S. Attorney Service—Southern District of Georgia, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Savannah, GA, for Plaintiff-Appellee

James Scott Byrne, James S. Byrne, Attorney at Law, Savannah, GA, Arvo Henifin, The Henifin Law Firm, Savannah, GA, for Defendant-Appellant

Before WLLIAM PRYOR, JORDAN and ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Jacquel Searles appeals his conviction for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2), 924(e). Searles argues that his trial counsel was ineffective for misadvising him that his prior convictions for burglary would not be used to enhance his sentence under the Armed Career Criminal Act. *See id.*§ 924(e). Because the district court did not have an opportunity to consider this argument and develop a record regarding trial counsel’s performance, we decline to consider Searles’s argument for the first time on direct appeal. *See United States v. Puentes-Hurtado,*794 F.3d 1278, 1285 (11th Cir. 2015). Searles can raise his argument in a postconviction motion. *See*28 U.S.C. § 2255.

We AFFIRM Searles’s conviction.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4628-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2022-0001]

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the Commonwealth of Virginia (FEMA-4628-DR), dated October 26, 2021, and related determinations.

# DATES:

This change occurred on February 4, 2022.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Catharine O. Fan, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

This action terminates the appointment of Timothy S. Pheil as Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. 2022-04585 Filed 3-3-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
# THE STATE OF TEXAS

M A N D A T E

*********************************************

TO THE 159TH DISTRIC T COURT OF ANGELINA COUNTY, GREETING:

Before our Court of Appeals for the 12th Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 21 st day of June, 2017 , the caus e upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

RICKY DALE BRIMER , Appellant

NO. 12

- 16

- 00292

- CR; Trial Court No. 2016

- 0214

Opinion by Brian Hoyle, Justice.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

was determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

“ THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record and briefs filed herein, and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this court that there was no error in the judgment.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that th e judgment of the court

below be in all things affirmed , and that this decision be certified to the court below for

observance. ”

WHEREAS, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District of Texas i n this behalf, and in all things have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS, THE HONORABLE JAMES T. WORTHEN , Chief Justice of our Court of Appeals for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District, with the Seal thereof affixed, at the City of Tyler, t his the 27 th day of November , 2017.

PAM ESTES , CLERK

By:

_______________________________ Chief Deputy Clerk
#### LEITUTUA of Leone, Plaintiff v. MATUTIA of Leone, Defendant

No. 3-1926

High Court of American Samoa Civil Jurisdiction, Trial Division [Land: “Puapua”]

March 21, 1929

JAMES W. FOXALL, LUTU and PELE, *Judges*

To try the right of Matutia to register land “Puapua”

JUDGMENT

The above case came on to be heard before the High Court, with Judges Foxall, Lutu and Pele sitting, at Leone, Tutuila, American Samoa on Thursday, March 21, 1929, at 10:00 o’clock A.M.

The court expressed its desire to have the people directly concerned in any case, amicably agree upon its disposition where possible, citing the results obtained along these lines in Manua.

*418The court then inquired as to whether the parties to the litigation were willing to consider the case before the court, with a view to agreeing between themselves as to its disposition, if they had not already done so.

Both sides agreed to retire and discuss their differences and report back to the court at 2:00 P.M. that afternoon.

Upon the convening of the court at 2:00 P.M. both parties stated that they had agreed between themselves as to what was proper to be done. They desired the case to be dismissed and stated to the court that upon the completion of a few family arrangements, which they had already agreed upon, the land would again be offered for registration without objection.

It is therefore adjudged and decreed, upon the motion of the parties hereto, that the above case be dismissed, and it is therefore so ordered.