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

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 262

Expressing the sense of the Senate that sanctions should be imposed on

the People’s Republic of China until the United States Trade Representative certifies that the People’s Republic of China is complying with

its agreement with the United States regarding the protection of intellectual property rights.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 13, 1996

Mrs. BOXER (for herself and Mr. GREGG) submitted the following resolution;

which was referred to the Committee on Finance

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the Senate that sanctions should

be imposed on the People’s Republic of China until the

United States Trade Representative certifies that the

People’s Republic of China is complying with its agreement with the United States regarding the protection

of intellectual property rights.

Whereas violations by the People’s Republic of China of United States intellectual property rights cost the United

States economy an estimated $2,300,000,000 in 1995;

Whereas in 1991, 1992, and 1994, the office of the United

States Trade Representative initiated special section 301

investigations of the People’s Republic of China’s intellec-
2

•SRES 262 IS

tual property rights violations, but did not impose sanctions;

Whereas in 1995 the People’s Republic of China entered into

an agreement with the United States that called for the

closing of, or cessation of illegal activities in, factories

that were pirating American videotapes, computer software, CD–ROMs, compact disks, and laser disks;

Whereas despite the terms of the 1995 Intellectual Property

Rights Agreement, piracy of intellectual property rights

has continued in the People’s Republic of China;

Whereas while United States officials report that officials of

the People’s Republic of China have recently raided and

closed a few factories engaged in piracy, in the past such

actions have been cosmetic and only temporary; and

Whereas the United States Trade Representative has determined that the People’s Republic of China tolerates the

greatest volume of intellectual property rights piracy of

all of the United States trading partners: Now, therefore,

be it

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that sanc2 tions should be imposed upon the People’s Republic of

3 China for its failure to comply with the 1995 Intellectual

4 Property Rights Agreement which it entered into with the

5 United States and that such sanctions should remain in

6 effect until the United States Trade Representative cer7 tifies to the Congress that the People’s Republic of China

8 is complying with all of the terms of that Agreement by

9 either—
3

•SRES 262 IS

1 (1) closing all factories that are engaged in pi2 racy, or

3 (2) assuring such factories operate only pursu4 ant to joint ventures or licensing agreements with

5 United States companies.

Æ
#### Derrick D. BOGER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Roy COOPER, Governor; W. David Guice, Commissioner of Prisons; George T. Solomon, Director of Prisons; Susan White, Superintendent, Alexander Correctional, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-7127

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: January 30, 2018

Decided: February 1, 2018

Derrick D. Boger, Appellant Pro Se.

Before MOTZ and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

*147Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Derrick D. Boger appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Boger v. Cooper,*No. 5:17-ev-00141-FDW, 2017 WL 3496459 (W.D.N.C. Aug. 15, 2017). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           1,338
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   28,376
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,279
<INVENTORY>                                     30,176
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                67,139
<PP&E>                                          48,192
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 289,624
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           36,598
<BONDS>                                        103,657
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            17
<OTHER-SE>                                     130,657
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   289,624
<SALES>                                        108,379
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               108,379
<CGS>                                           52,546
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   52,546
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,793
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 11,272
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,041
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,231
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,231
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.41
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.41
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                             445
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           3,621
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     22,376
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           6,700
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             6,857
<LOANS>                                         51,335
<ALLOWANCE>                                        146
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  86,159
<DEPOSITS>                                      54,450
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,223
<LONG-TERM>                                      9,083
<COMMON>                                        14,132
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,271
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  86,159
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  1,842
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  622
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   438
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 2,902
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               1,295
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,536
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            1,366
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  1,083
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    309
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         208
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       208
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .16
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.34
<LOANS-NON>                                         48
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   146
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  146
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            146
        

</TABLE>
----

(2004/C 88 E/0573)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1054/04

by Franz Turchi (UEN) to the Commission

(5 April 2004)

Subject:   Increase in European School fees

The Board of Governors of the European Schools met in Brussels on 15 March this year. The topics discussed at the meeting included the increase in fees paid for each pupil each academic year.

It was decided by 12 votes in favour to increase the fees for the 2005/2006 academic year by 11 %, plus the average rate of inflation in Europe. Italy Greece, Spain, Portugal and the Netherlands voted against.

Parents are extremely worried, since such decisions do not encourage broad access to education.

At the meeting the parents' representative expressed his concern at the planned increases, since they would lead to the elimination of category III pupils, i.e. those not automatically entitled to attend a European School. What will the Commission do to ensure that access to the European Schools is not restricted in the near future?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 2004)

The Honourable Member is referred to the answer given by the Commission to the written question E-0237/04 by Mrs Miet Smet (1) concerning fees in European Schools and the reasons for the increases decided by the Board of Governors, the body of representatives from all Member States on which the Commission has one place and one vote.

The fees agreed by the Board of Governors on 15 March 2004 for all Category III pupils (that is, pupils whose parents are not employed by any EU Institution) for the 2005/2006 school year amount to EUR 2 400 for nursery school, EUR 3 300 for primary school and EUR 4 500 for secondary school. These fees are well below the real average cost of almost EUR 11 000 per pupil. A Working Group is being set up by the Board of Governors, at the Commission's suggestion, to examine the issues of fees, fee exonerations and access for Category III pupils in future years.

----

(1)OJ C 84 E, 3.4.2004, p. 339.

----
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NOS. AP-76,569 & AP-76,570

IN RE CHARLES KEVIN BOWEN AND JENNIFER BOWEN, Relators

ON APPLICATIONS FOR WRITS OF PROHIBITION

IN CAUSE NOS. 09-649-K368 & 09-650-K368

IN THE 368

th DISTRICT COURT FROM

WILLIAMSON COUNTY

Per curiam.

OPINION

Relators are charged with capital murder and have mandamus applications currently under

submission at this Court that could decide who will represent them in the trial court. In re Charles

Kevin Bowen and Jennifer Bowen, AP-76,519 & AP-76,520 (argued and submitted May 4, 2011). 

The trial court set the cases for pre-trial hearings and a trial setting in June. Relators responded with

motions to stay the proceedings which this Court construed as motions for leave to file applications

for prohibition. The Court invited the trial court and the State to submit responses. 

The State’s response suggests that the trial court simply kept the cases on the trial docket out
2

of concern for the Relators’ already lengthy incarceration and in anticipation of this Court’s ruling

on the mandamus applications before the June 13, 2011 trial date. The State does not oppose a stay,

so long as neither the State nor the trial court are assigned fault for the delay.

The Relators’ motions for leave to file writs of prohibition are granted. The issue of the

legality of the trial court’s disqualification of retained trial counsel in these capital murder

prosecutions is under submission at this Court. Further proceedings in the trial court before this

Court’s decision would nullify the pending mandamus applications. Accordingly, we conclude that

issuance of writs of prohibition are necessary in order to protect this Court’s jurisdiction. TEX.

CONST. art. V, § 5(c). 

The Respondent, the Judge of the 368 District Court of Williamson County, is directed to th

stay the proceedings and is prohibited from taking further action in Cause Numbers 09-649-K368

and 09-650-K368 until this Court issues its decision in the Relator’s pending mandamus

applications, Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas cause numbers AP-76,519 and AP-76,520.

Filed: May 27, 2011

Do not publish
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 27 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.Con.Res.27
                                      Agreed to October 17, 1995        

                       One Hundred Fourth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
  the fourth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-five

                          Concurrent Resolution

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That the action of the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the 
President pro tempore of the Senate in signing the bill (H.R. 402) is 
rescinded, and the Clerk of the House of Representatives shall, in the 
reenrollment of the bill, make the following correction:
    Strike section 109.
  Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.

  Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7335

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

WAYNE PORTER,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Richard L. Voorhees, 

District Judge. (3:85-cr-00062-RLV-1; 3:14-cv-00373-RLV)

Submitted: March 19, 2015 Decided: March 24, 2015

Before WILKINSON and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Wayne Porter, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Lee Edwards, Assistant 

United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Wayne Porter seeks to appeal the district court’s order 

construing his filing as a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion and 

dismissing it as successive.* The order is not appealable unless 

a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of 

appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate 

of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of 

the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) 

(2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a 

prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that 

reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s 

assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. 

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. 

Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). When the district court 

denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must 

demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is 

debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the 

denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Porter has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny 

a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma 

 * We reject Porter’s claim that his challenge was cognizable 

under former Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(a). See United States v. 

Little, 392 F.3d 671, 678 (4th Cir. 2004).
3

pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
##### 



Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(18 U.S.C. Section 1350)

The undersigned executive officer of Jacksonville Bancorp, Inc., (the
Registrant) hereby certifies that the Registrants Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended June 30, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained therein
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Registrant.



| | /s/ Bill W. Taylor
Name: Bill W. Taylor
Title: Executive Vice President and
          Chief Financial Officer
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: August 11, 2003

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                             464,611
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      990,607
<ALLOWANCES>                                        41,054
<INVENTORY>                                     47,158,306
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                57,625,006
<PP&E>                                          27,398,385
<DEPRECIATION>                                           0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 100,321,876
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           27,438,262
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               83,106
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                      32,644,329
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   100,321,876
<SALES>                                         38,650,739
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                40,714,366
<CGS>                                           28,548,135
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   40,241,589
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,371,217
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (202,333)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (2,100,773)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (829,800)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      0
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1,270,973)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (0.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (0.10)
        


</TABLE>
III

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 275

To express the sense of the Senate concerning Afghanistan.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 28, 1996

Mr. BROWN submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on Foreign Relations

RESOLUTION

To express the sense of the Senate concerning Afghanistan.

Whereas, prior to 1979, Afghanistan was a peaceful, united

country;

Whereas the successful fight of brave men and women of Afghanistan resisting the Soviet invasion and occupation of

1979–1989 was a significant element in the dissolution of

the Soviet empire;

Whereas the dissolution of the Soviet empire brought freedom

to the nations of central and eastern Europe as well as

to the nations of central Asia;

Whereas although many years after the Soviet Union withdrawal, Afghanistan does not enjoy the peace it has

earned;
2

SRES 275 IS

Whereas the United Nations can play a unique and important

role in bringing an end to the conflict in Afghanistan;

and

Whereas recent meetings between Members of Congress and

the representatives of the major Afghan factions indicate

a significant desire on the part of all parties to achieve

a peaceful resolution to the conflict in Afghanistan and

the establishment of an effective government that represents the interests of the Afghan people: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that—

2 (1) the courageous people of Afghanistan have

3 earned the world’s respect and support for their epic

4 struggle against the forces of communism;

5 (2) resolving the continuing conflict in Afghani6 stan and alleviating the accompanying humanitarian

7 distress of the Afghan people should be a top prior8 ity of the United States;

9 (3) outside interference and the provision of

10 arms and military supplies to the warring parties

11 should be halted;

12 (4) a unique moment in Afghan civil war exists

13 where all major factions are searching for a peaceful

14 solution to the conflict;

15 (5) the United States should urge the United

16 Nations to move quickly to appoint a special envoy

17 to Afghanistan who will act aggressively to assist the
3

SRES 275 IS

1 Afghans to achieve a solution to the conflict accept2 able to the Afghan people; and

3 (6) the United Nations should work to create

4 the conditions for a continuing dialogue among the

5 Afghan factions.

Æ