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

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2750 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2750

To suspend temporarily the duty on mixtures of aminocyclopyrachlor and 
                           inert ingredients.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 7, 2012

   Mr. Casey introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To suspend temporarily the duty on mixtures of aminocyclopyrachlor and 
                           inert ingredients.

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

SECTION 1. MIXTURES OF AMINOCYCLOPYRACHLOR AND INERT INGREDIENTS.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00        Mixtures of         Free            No change      No change      On or before     ''.
                          aminocyclopyrachl                                                 12/31/2015
                          or (6-amino-5-
                          chloro-2-
                          cyclopropyl-4-
                          pyrimidinecarboxy
                          lic acid) and
                          inert ingredients
                          (CAS No. 858956-
                          08-8) (provided
                          for in subheading
                          2933.59.10)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
IN RE: Stuart H. SMITH

NO. 2018-B-0506

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 9, 2018

ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDING

PER CURIAM

Respondent and the Office of Disciplinary Counsel ("ODC") submitted a joint petition for consent discipline, in which respondent acknowledges that he violated Rule 8.4(b) of the Rules of Professional Conduct based upon his conviction of cyberstalking. Having reviewed the petition,

IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Consent Discipline be accepted and that Stuart H. Smith, Louisiana Bar Roll number 17805, be suspended from the practice of law for a period of three months. This suspension shall be deferred in its entirety, subject to respondent's successful completion of a one-year period of unsupervised probation governed by the conditions set forth in the petition for consent discipline. The probationary period shall commence from the date respondent and the ODC execute a formal probation plan. Any failure of respondent to comply with the conditions of probation, or any misconduct during the probationary period, may be grounds for making the deferred suspension executory, or imposing additional discipline, as appropriate.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all costs and expenses in the matter are assessed against respondent in accordance with Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 10.1, with legal interest to commence thirty days from the date of finality of this court's judgment until paid.
EXHIBIT 32.1   NETWORK EQUIPMENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.   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 Quarterly Report of Network Equipment Technologies, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 25, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, C. Nicholas Keating, Jr., President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, 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) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and 2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  August 3, 2010    /s/ C. NICHOLAS KEATING, JR. C. Nicholas Keating, Jr.
President and Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit
32.2





CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Annual Report of Reef Global Energy IV, L.P. (the
Partnership) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Daniel C. Sibley, principal financial officer of Reef Global Energy IV, L.P.,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:





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





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





Date:  April
      2, 2010
                  /s/
      Daniel C. SibleyDaniel
      C. SibleyChief
      Financial OfficerReef
      Exploration, L.P.(principal financial and
      accounting
officer)





This
certification accompanies the Report pursuant to §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 Partnership for purposes of §18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





A signed
original of this written statement required by §906 has been provided to the
Partnership and will be retained by the partnership and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED April 11, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-20559 Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JONATHAN LEE RICHES, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:03-CR-90-2

-------------------- Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Jonathan Lee Riches appeals his sentence following his guilty plea conviction for conspiracy to commit wire fraud and for wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371 and 1343. He contends that he was sentenced in contravention of United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220 (2005). Riches’s plea agreement contained an express waiver of his “right to appeal the sentence imposed or the manner in which it was determined,” but he retained the right to appeal “ only (a) the sentence imposed above the statutory maximum; or (b) anNo. 04-20559 -2- upward departure from the Sentencing Guidelines, which has not been requested by the United States as set forth in Title 18 U.S.C. § 3742(b).” The Government seeks to enforce the waiver. Our review of the record indicates that the waiver was knowing and voluntary and that, under its plain language, it bars Riches’s Booker arguments. See United States v. Bond, 414 F.3d 542, 545-46 (5th Cir. 2005). The waiver is not invalid merely because it was made before Booker . See United States v. Burns , 433 F.3d 442, 450-51 (5th Cir. 2005). AFFIRMED.
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 271 

To require the Secretary of Agriculture to enter into a property conveyance 

with the city of Wallowa, Oregon, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 3, 2011 

Mr. WYDEN (for himself and Mr. MERKLEY) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To require the Secretary of Agriculture to enter into a property conveyance with the city of Wallowa, Oregon, 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 ‘‘Wallowa Forest Service 

5 Compound Conveyance Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. CONVEYANCE TO CITY OF WALLOWA, OREGON. 

7 (a) DEFINITIONS.—In this Act: 

8 (1) CITY.—The term ‘‘City’’ means the city of 

9 Wallowa, Oregon. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 271 IS

1 (2) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means 

2 the Secretary of Agriculture. 

3 (3) WALLOWA FOREST SERVICE COMPOUND.— 

4 The term ‘‘Wallowa Forest Service Compound’’ 

5 means the approximately 1.11 acres of National 

6 Forest System land that— 

7 (A) was donated by the City to the Forest 

8 Service on March 18, 1936; and 

9 (B) is located at 602 First Street, 

10 Wallowa, Oregon. 

11 (b) CONVEYANCE.—On the request of the City sub12 mitted to the Secretary by the date that is not later than 

13 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act and subject 

14 to the provisions of this Act, the Secretary shall convey 

15 to the City all right, title, and interest of the United States 

16 in and to the Wallowa Forest Service Compound. 

17 (c) CONDITIONS.—The conveyance under subsection 

18 (b) shall be— 

19 (1) by quitclaim deed; 

20 (2) for no consideration; and 

21 (3) subject to— 

22 (A) valid existing rights; and 

23 (B) such terms and conditions as the Sec24 retary may require. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 271 IS

1 (d) USE OF WALLOWA FOREST SERVICE COM2 POUND.—As a condition of the conveyance under sub3 section (b), the City shall— 

4 (1) use the Wallowa Forest Service Compound 

5 as a historical and cultural interpretation and edu6 cation center; 

7 (2) ensure that the Wallowa Forest Service 

8 Compound is managed by a nonprofit entity; and 

9 (3) agree to manage the Wallowa Forest Serv10 ice Compound with due consideration and protection 

11 for the historic values of the Wallowa Forest Service 

12 Compound. 

13 (e) REVERSION.—In the quitclaim deed to the City, 

14 the Secretary shall provide that the Wallowa Forest Serv15 ice Compound shall revert to the Secretary, at the election 

16 of the Secretary, if any of the conditions under subsection 

17 (c) or (d) are violated. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
Pierre Duclos LASNIER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-415

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed November 22, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
# Official Journal C 254/4 Au

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 254 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 604 August 2017 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 254

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 604 August 2017

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2017/C 254/01 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2017/C 254/01

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  1
  )

1

1

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                  EXHIBIT 11.1



                      COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE


                                               Three Months ended
                                                    March 31,
                                                2004        2003
                                             ----------  ----------
<S>                                          <C>         <C>

Net income                                   $  359,052  $  758,278
                                             ==========  ==========

Weighted average number of common
  and common equivalent shares:

Weighted average common shares outstanding    2,872,234   2,818,289

Shares issued from assumed exercise of
  common stock equivalents(1)                    67,651      49,979
                                             ----------  ----------

Weighted average number of common and
  common equivalent shares outstanding        2,939,885   2,868,268
                                             ==========  ==========

Net income per share:
         Basic                               $      .13  $      .27
                                             ==========  ==========

         Diluted                             $      .12  $      .26
                                             ==========  ==========
<FN>

(1)  The number of common stock equivalents excluded from the computation of net
     income per share at March 31, 2004 and March 31, 2003 was 0 and 260,
     respectively, because they were anti-dilutive.
</TABLE>


<PAGE>
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2527 

To suspend temporarily the duty on triflic acid. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 7, 2012 

Ms. LANDRIEU introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on triflic acid. 

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

3 SECTION 1. TRIFLIC ACID. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Triflic acid (CAS No. 

1493–13–6) (provided for 

in subheading 2904.90.50) Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2527 IS

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

2 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-1524

ROSMERY JULIA VEGA-ARGENDONA, Petitioner,
versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A75-774-663) Submitted: February 14, 2007 Decided: March 26, 2007 Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Petition denied in part; granted in part and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kim-Bun Thomas Li, LI, LATSEY & GUITERMAN, PLLC, Washington, D.C., for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, James A. Hunolt, Senior Ligation Counsel, Lindsay L. Chichester, OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Rosmery Julia Vega-Argendona, a native and citizen of Bolivia, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) adopting and affirming the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), and the IJ’s finding of ineligibility for adjustment of status. We have reviewed Vega-Argendona’s challenge to the finding that she failed to qualify for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under CAT, and conclude that she fails to demonstrate that the evidence compels a contrary result. SeeINS v. Elias-Zacarias , 502 U.S. 478, 483-84 (1992). We therefore deny the petition for review in part with respect to these claims. Vega-Argendona next disputes, inter alia , the finding that she is removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(C)(ii)(I) (2000), and is thus ineligible for a waiver of inadmissibility that would be necessary for her to qualify for adjustment of status. She contends that the agency overlooked legal and factual issues related to her claim, in that it did not make a finding as to the date or dates on which she made the alleged false representation, a date which is directly relevant to whether the ground of removability is in fact applicable to her. As our review discloses that this claim has not in fact been addressed below, we grant the petition for review in part and- 3 - remand this issue and other issues related to that ground of removability to the Board. See Gonzales v. Thomas , 126 S. Ct. 1613, 1615 (2006); INS v. Ventura , 537 U.S. 12, 16 (2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED IN PART ; GRANTED IN PART AND REMANDED
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 72 (Thursday, April 16, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 17672]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-8670]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human 
Development; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting. The meeting will be open to the public, with attendance 
limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need 
special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other 
reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed 
below in advance of the meeting.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Child Health and Human 
Development Special Emphasis Panel; ``Comparative Evaluation of 
Assisted Reproductive Technologies and Birth Outcomes''.
    Date: May 6, 2009.
    Time: 2 p.m. to 3 p.m.
    Agenda: To provide concept review of proposed concept review.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6100 Executive Boulevard 
Room 5B01, Rockville, MD 20852 (Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Sathasiva B. Kandasamy, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Division of Scientific Review, National Institute of 
Child Health and Human Development, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 
5B01, Bethesda, MD 20892-9304, (301) 435-6680, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection" class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c0b3aba1aea4a1b3a1ada1a9ac80eeaea9a8eea7afb6">[email protected]</a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, 
Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 
93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, 
Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National 
Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: April 7, 2009.
Anna Snouffer,
Deputy Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. E9-8670 Filed 4-15-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
exv10w19



 





Exhibit 10.19




Cash Compensation for Non-Employee Directors



Volterra Semiconductor Corporation’s non-employee board members receive the following cash
compensation for services performed:



Annual cash retainer for service as:




	 	 	 	 	 
	Chairman of the Board of Directors:
	 	$	10,000	 
	Member of Board of Directors:
	 	$	25,000	 
	Member of Audit Committee:
	 	$	7,000	 
	Member of Compensation Committee:
	 	$	3,500	 
	Member of Nominating and Governance Committee:
	 	$	2,500	 
	Audit Committee Chair:
	 	$	15,000	 
	Compensation Committee Chair:
	 	$	7,000	 
	Nominating and Governance Committee Chair:
	 	$	5,000
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. §1350,****AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO****SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the annual report on Form 10-K/A of NextSource Materials Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended June 30, 2017, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Craig Scherba, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 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) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

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

 

Date: November 2, 2017

 

 

| By:          | /s/ Craig Scherba                     |
|--------------|---------------------------------------|
|    | Craig Scherba                         |
|    | *Chief Executive Officer*        |
|    | *(principal executive officer)*  |
DISMISS; and Opinion Filed August 10 , 2016 . 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05 - 16 - 00 943 - CV IN RE HOMEOWNERS’ ASSOCIAT ION OF PRINCETON MEA DOW, INC. , Relator Original Proceeding from the Justice Court , Precinct # 2 Collin County, Texas Justice Court Cause No. 02 - SC - 15 - 00068 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright and Justices Lang

- Miers and Brown Opinion by Justice Lang

- Miers In this original pr oceeding, relator asks the Court to issue a writ directing the justice court to vacate certain orders and judgments. Appellate courts do not generally have writ jurisdiction over justice courts. T EX . G OV ’ T C ODE A NN . § 22.221(b) (writ jurisdiction over dis t rict and county courts only). The exception is if the writ is necessary to protect this Court’s jurisdiction. T EX . G OV ’ T C ODE A NN . § 22.221(a) (“Each court of appeals or a justice of a court of appeals may issue a writ of mandamus and all other writs neces sary to enforce the jurisdiction of the court.”). No appeal is pending in this Court related to the justice court orders at issue. As such, our jurisdiction is not at risk. Relator’s remedy, i f any, lies in the county court. See, e.g., Houston v. Sw. O utdoor, Inc ., 05

- 14

- 00936

- CV, 2016 WL 2591243, at *2 (Tex. App.

— Dallas May 3, 2016, no pet.) (“A statutory county court has mandamus power over justice courts.”)– 2

– (citing T EX . G OV ’ T C ODE A NN . § 25.0004(a) (West Supp.2015) and Meridien Hotels, Inc. v. LHO Fi n. P’ship I, L.P., 97 S.W.3d 731, 736

– 37 (Tex. App.

— Dallas 2003, no pet.)). We D ISMISS relator’s petition for writ of mandamus for want of jurisdiction
.

16 09 43 F.P05 /Elizabeth Lang

- Miers/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE