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

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2630 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Pymetrozine. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 7, 2012 

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska introduced the following bill; which was read twice 

and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Pymetrozine. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PYMETROZINE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.13.30 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 Pymetrozine) is amended by striking the date in the effec7 tive period column and inserting ‘‘12/31/2015’’. 

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

9 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

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

11 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2814 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2814

    To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain synthetic 
                            filament yarns.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 7, 2012

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain synthetic 
                            filament yarns.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN SYNTHETIC FILAMENT YARNS.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.01.90 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to certain synthetic filament 
yarns) is amended by striking the date in the effective period column 
and inserting ``12/31/2015''.
    (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with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 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>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           4,984
<SECURITIES>                                   115,051
<RECEIVABLES>                                   25,457
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 145,492
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,954
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     142,538
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   145,492
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                10,121
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,449
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  8,672
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              8,672
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,672
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .69
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer 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 Avantair, Inc., a Delaware
corporation (the Company), on Form 10-K for the period ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Steven Santo, Chief Executive Officer (principal
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, 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 Company.

Date: December 5, 2007



|                 |  |                        
|---------------- |  | -----------------------
|/s/ Steven Santo
|Name:            |  | Steven Santo           
|Title:           |  | Chief Executive Officer
# United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit

No. 13-1469 CHENELL HAMMOND, Plaintiff, Appellant,

v. KMART CORPORATION and SEARS HOLDINGS CORPORATION, Defendants, Appellees.

ERRATA SHEET The opinion of this Court issued on October 25, 2013 is amended as follows: On page 9, line 5 "Garret" is changed to "Garrett". On page 11, footnote 3, line 5 "Ch." is changed to "ch."
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO****18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO****SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002**

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Brooktrout, Inc. (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2004 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, RobertC. Leahy, Vice President of Finance and Operations of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

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

 

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

 
| Date: May 7, 2004 | By:    | /s/  ROBERT  C. LEAHY                 |   |
|-------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------|--------|
|              |   | Robert  C. Leahy                                |   |
|              |   | *Vice President of Finance and Operations*      |   |
|              |   | *(Principal Financial and Accounting  Officer)* |   |

 

1

----
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

I, Thomas S. Kohlmann, President & Chief Executive Officer of Suffolk
Bancorp (the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that: (1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended March 31,
2008 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and (2) the information contained in the Report fairly represents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                                   
|-----------------------------------
|Dated: May 5, 2008                 
|                                   
|/s/ Thomas S. Kohlmann             
|Thomas S. Kohlmann                 
|President & Chief Executive Officer



Page 21
STATE EX REL. Dereck Darnell TAYLOR, Jr. v. STATE of Louisiana

No. 2018-KH-0178

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 16, 2018

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF RAPIDES**

PER CURIAM:

*290WRIT NOT CONSIDERED. Petitioner has not demonstrated that he sought review in the court(s) below before filing in this Court nor shown the "extraordinary circumstances" that would justify bypassing that level of review. La.S.Ct.R. X § 5(b).
Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2012-0594 Directorate Identifier: 2012-NM-019-AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update 

accordingly. If they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Do not include oncondition costs here

Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

propeller, appliance)

Work-hours

(include 

access, testing, 

and close-up)

Labor 

cost 

(@$85/h

our)

Parts Cost Total Costs 

(labor + 

parts)

Number of 

U.S. 

Registered

Products

Total Cost 

for U.S. Fleet

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

The known number of products in compliance:

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $ 0

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $

On-Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Work-hours

(include access, 

testing, and closeup)

Labor cost 

(@$85/hour)

Parts Cost Cost per Product

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated 

Costs table that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs):
Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? 

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain

for either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO 

Explanation: 

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements 

for aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES NO
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0664

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

TANYA TWOTEETH,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including October 5, 2023, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 29 2023

08/29/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0664
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21

- 6695

WARREN LEON CORUM , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. CHAD MASON, Police Officer; CHRISTOPHER RUSSO, Police Officer; PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT, Department Police , Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria

. Anthony John Trenga, Senior District Judge. ( 1:20

- cv - 00573

- AJT

- TCB )

Submitted : October 1, 2021 Decided: November 17, 2021

Before KING, DIAZ, and HARRIS , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Warren Leon Corum , Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Warren Leon Corum appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by t he district court. Corum v. Mason , No.
1:20

- cv - 00573

- AJT

- TCB (E.D. Va. Mar. 11, 2021)

. We deny Corum’s motion for appointment of counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials be fore this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
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

The undersigned, Colman Cheng, the Chief Financial Officer of
CHINA NUTRIFRUIT GROUP LIMITED (the Company), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:

1. The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended December 31, 2009 (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2. Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the
Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has executed this
statement this 8th day of February, 2010.

/s/ Colman
ChengColman Cheng Chief Financial Officer (Principal
Financial Officer)

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to China Nutrifruit Group Limited and will be retained by
China Nutrifruit Group Limited and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

The forgoing certification is being furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being
filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the
Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general
incorporation language in such filing.

---
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

June 23, 2010 

Order 

 

June 23, 2010 

139872(49) 

LEAH ROSE FOSTER, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 SC: 139872 

v COA: 291825 

Monroe Circuit Court Family 

DAVID KENNETH WOLKOWITZ, Division: 08-002771-DP 

Defendant-Appellant. 

________________________________ 

 On order of the Chief Justice, the motion by the State Bar of Michigan Family 

Law Council for leave to file its brief amicus curiae is considered and it is GRANTED.
**EXHIBIT      32.2**

**CERTIFICATION      OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**PURSUANT      TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

| (1) | such                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 such Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Bridge                Capital Holdings. |
|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:                March 6, 2008 |   | /s/                Thomas A. Sa         |  |
|------------------------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------|--|
|                               |   | Thomas                A. Sa                  |
|                               |   | Executive                Vice President      |
|                               |   | Chief                Administrative Officer  |
|                               |   | Chief                Financial Officer       |
|                               |   | (Principal                Financial Officer) |

----
Order entered April 27, 2020

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-00439-CV

JOHN PANIAGUA, ET AL., Appellants

V.

WEEKLEY HOMES, LLC, Appellee

On Appeal from the 298th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-19-02097

ORDER

Before the Court is appellants’ unopposed motion for extension of time to 

file their reply brief. We GRANT the motion and ORDER the reply brief 

received April 21, 2020 filed as of the date of this order.

/s/ ERIN A. NOWELL 

JUSTICE
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 v. 

SHAWN VINCENT BEST, Sr., 

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 22-30199 

D.C. No. 2:22-cr-00001-RMP-1 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Washington

Rosanna Malouf Peterson, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted September 12, 2023**

Before: CANBY, CALLAHAN, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.

Shawn Vincent Best, Sr., appeals from the district court’s judgment and 

challenges the 46-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for 

assault resulting in substantial bodily injury to a domestic partner in Indian 

country, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 113(a)(7), 1153(a). We have jurisdiction 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

SEP 20 2023

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 22-30199 

under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Best contends that the district court failed to explain adequately its decision 

to impose an above-Guidelines sentence. He further argues that the court 

improperly relied on facts he did not admit and the government did not prove, 

resulting in a substantively unreasonable sentence. In Best’s view, the uncontested 

facts and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors supported a time-served sentence. We 

review Best’s unpreserved procedural claims for plain error, see United States v. 

Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and his claim that the 

sentence is substantively unreasonable for an abuse of discretion, see Gall v. 

United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).

The district court did not procedurally err, nor did it abuse its discretion in 

imposing the above-Guidelines sentence. The court provided a thorough 

explanation for its sentencing decision, explaining that upward departures were 

warranted for: (1) Best’s uncounted tribal convictions for conduct similar to the 

offense conduct, see U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3, and (2) the extreme psychological injury 

Best caused his victim, see U.S.S.G. § 5K2.3. The court further explained that the 

§ 3553(a) factors independently supported the upward variance given the harm 

Best caused to the victim, his criminal history, his lack of remorse at sentencing, 

and the need to protect the public. This explanation was more than sufficient. See 

United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc). Moreover, the 
3 22-30199 

court permissibly relied on the presentence report and the victim’s sentencing 

statement. See United States v. Christensen, 732 F.3d 1094, 1102, 1104-05 (9th 

Cir. 2013). Finally, the 46-month sentence is substantively reasonable in light of 

the totality of the circumstances. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51.

AFFIRMED.
Base Salaries for Named Executive Officers of C&F Financial Corporation



 EXHIBIT 10.16 
 BASE SALARIES FOR NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS 
 OF 
 C&F FINANCIAL CORPORATION 
 The
following are the base salaries (on an annual basis) in effect as of January 1, 2008 of the named executive officers* of C&F Financial Corporation: 
  

				
	 Larry G. Dillon
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
	  	$	243,000
		
	 Thomas F. Cherry
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
	  	$	180,000
		
	 Bryan E. McKernon
President and Chief Executive Officer of C&F Mortgage Corporation
	  	$	195,000

  

			
	  
	 	
	Robert L. Bryant, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer resigned, effective February 29, 2008.
Certification of Principal Financial Officer
                      Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350
            (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)


I, Tom B. Dake, Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer)
of Miltope Group, Inc.(the "Registrant"), certify that  to the best of
my knowledge, based upon a review of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
for the period ended September 28, 2003 of the Registrant (the
"Report"):

     (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
          13(a) [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 results of
          operations of the Registrant.


/s/ Tom B. Dake
------------------------------

Name:     Tom B. Dake
Date:     November 10, 2003
Comment Info: =================

General Comment:2011-7-3 Order Requesting Proposals.