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

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2552 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2552

 To renew the temporary suspension of duty on yttrium oxide phosphor, 
                         activated by europium.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 7, 2012

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To renew the temporary suspension of duty on yttrium oxide phosphor, 
                         activated by europium.

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

SECTION 1. YTTRIUM OXIDE PHOSPHOR, ACTIVATED BY EUROPIUM.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.22.69 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to yttrium oxide phosphor, 
activated by europium) 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 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 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>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM SEC FORM
10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                             551
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   38,827
<ALLOWANCES>                                       433
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                43,563
<PP&E>                                          17,867
<DEPRECIATION>                                  11,076
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  73,506
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           36,633
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        32,240
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,858
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    73,506
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                46,506
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   64,179
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,699
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (19,128)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (3,617)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (15,511)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    209
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (15,720)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (2.26)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.26)


</TABLE>
In the MATTER OF the COMMITMENT OF C.G.W.

NO. 2018-C-0326

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 16, 2018

Denied.
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2748 

To suspend temporarily the duty on benzamine, 

dodecyl-, branched. 

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 benzamine, 

dodecyl-, branched. 

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

3 SECTION 1. BENZAMINE, DODECYL-, BRANCHED. 

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 Benzamine, dodecyl-, 

branched (CAS No. 

68411–48–3) (provided for 

in subheading 2921.49.65) Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2748 IS

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

2 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 

3 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

4 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02 - 10 - 00339 - CV

ALONZO BRADLEY APPELLANT
V. PITNEY BOWES, INC. APPELLEE

---------- FROM THE 211TH DISTRICT COURT OF DENTON COUNTY

---------- 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1

---------- Alonzo B radley sued Pitney Bowes, Inc. and SupportKids, Inc. d/b/a CSE Child Enforcement contending that SupportKids wrongfully attempt ed to collect child support from him based on a void Louisiana order and that Pitney Bowes wrongfully garnished his wages based o n that order

. Appellant also alleged t hat Pitney Bowes had fired him from his area sales executive position because of a separate lawsuit that he had filed against Pitney Bowes attacking the void

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.2

Louisiana order , not because of poor job performance, which was the reason given by Pitney Bowes

. Appellant sued for an injunction to stop the wage withholding and for reinstatement to his former position with Pitney Bowes

. Pitney Bowes moved for summary judgment, which the trial court granted. The trial court granted a default judgment for Bradley against SupportKids, which it did not appeal. Appellant has failed to include Pitney Bowes’s summary judgment motion in the appellate record. Accordingly, he has failed to meet his burden to show reversible error. See Enterprise Leasing Co. v. Barrios , 156 S.W.3d 547, 549

– 50 (Tex. 2004); Sparkman v. Reliastar Life Ins. Co ., No. 13

- 03

- 00 500

- CV , 2008 WL 2058216, at * 11 (Tex. App.

–– Corpus Christi May 15, 2008, pet. denied) (mem. op.) ; Mallios v. Standard Ins. Co ., 237 S.W.3d 778, 781

– 83 (Tex. App.

–– Houston [14 th Dist.] 2007, pet. denied). Moreover, even if we were able to consider the copy of the motion for summary judgment attached to Pitney Bowes’s appendix, we would conclude that the trial court did not err by concl uding that Pitney Bowes proved its entitlement to summary judgment as a matter of law. See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § § 159.502, .504 (West 2008) (providing that recipient of order of withholding that is regular on its face must comply and is not subject to civ il liability for doing so) ; Tex. Dep’t of Human Servs. v. Hinds , 9 04 S.W.2d 629, 636 (Tex. 1995) (holding that plaintiff in employment retaliation action must prove causation) ; see, e.g. , McIntyre v. Lockheed Co rp ., 970 S.W.2d 695, 697

– 98 (Tex. App.

–– Fort Worth 1998, no pet.) (holding that proof of causation is required for3

recovery on termination action alleging retaliation for filing workers’ compensation claim )

. 2 Accordingly, we overrule all of appellant’s issues and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

T ERRIE LIVINGSTON CHIEF JUSTICE
PANEL: LIVINGSTON, C.J.; MEIER, J .; and DIXON W. HOLMAN (Senior Justice, Retired, Sitting by Assignment).
DELIVERED: August 4, 2011

2 See Frost Nat’l Bank v. Fernandez , 315 S.W.3d 494, 508 (T ex. 2010), cert. denied , 131 S. Ct. 1017 (2011); Mann Frankfort Stein & Lipp Advisors, Inc. v. Fielding , 289 S.W.3d 844, 848 (Tex. 2009) ; see also Tex. R. Civ. P. 166a(b), (c).
##### 



Exhibit 99.2

VIRCO MFG. CORPORATION

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS 906 OF THE
ADOPTED SECTION PURSUANT TO SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Virco Mfg. Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending October 31, 2002, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Robert E. Dose, Vice President  Finance of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to the best of 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
result of operations of the Company.



|Date: December 13, 2002 | /s/ Robert E. Dose                     
|----------------------- | ---------------------------------------
|                        | Robert E. Dose
Vice President  Finance
1/4/13 page of



### POST FOCUSEXPOSURE REPORT

Chemical ID: P-13-0077 Reviewer: Tobias/SS

Results Table: Dose, Concentration, and Days Exceeded Results Summary

Exposure Scenario 1 Water Landfill Stack Air Fugitive Air Drinking Water Fish Ingestion
ADR LADD ADR LADD 7Q10 4
CC = 2 PDM Days Exceede d LADD ADR LADD ADR LADD

Release activity(ies) 2 ; exposure calculation(s) 3 mg/kg/day mg/kg/day mg/kg/day mg/kg/day μg/l # Days mg/kg/day mg/kg/day mg/kg/day mg/kg/day mg/kg/day

max acute eco --- --- --- --- 5.47E+00 --- --- --- --- --- ---

1 Exposure scenario titles consist of release activity followed by exposure calculation abbreviation. 2 Release activities are from engineering report's Manuf acturing (Mfg), Processing (Proc) and Use release activity labels. Multiple release activities are combined in one exposure scenario if their releases occur at same location. 3 Exposure calculations are Acute Dose Rate (A DR), Lifetime Average Daily Dose (LADD), and Probabilistic Dilution Model (PDM). There may be one, two, or all three exposure calculations per exposure scenario. CC is the aquatic concentration of concern. 4 This column displays concentration values for the 7Q 10 streamflow, which is defined as the average daily streamflow of the seven consecutive days of lowest flow within a ten year period.



### Fate test recommendations?: (default is NA)1/4/13 page of

POST FOCUSEXPOSURE REPORT

Chemical ID: P-13-0077 Assessor: Tobias/SS

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES

Scenario#:1 Number of Release Sites: Release Activity: Max ADR
Release Description: WATER LANDFILL Non-sludge/Sludge STACK FUGITIVE

Total Releases: (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr)

Non-sludge/Sludge Release Days/yr:

Per Site Release: (kg/site/day) (kg/site/day) (kg/site/day) (kg/site/day)

Remarks:1/4/13 page of

POST FOCUSEXPOSURE REPORT

Chemical ID: P-13-0077

SIC-CODE BASED HUMAN AND AQUATIC EXPOSURES TO SURFACE WATER RELEASES

SCENARIO #: 1 Number of Sites: RELEASE ACTIVITY: Max ADR

SIC-CODE DESCRIPTION: POTW's (All facilities) SIC-CODE (S): 4952 EX POSED POPULATION: Adult

WWT REMOVAL (%) RELEASE DAYS PRETREATMENT RELEASE (kg/site/day) POSTTREATMENT RELEASE (kg/site/day) DWT (%) BCF (L/kg)

0.00 0.00

AQUATIC EXPOSURE ESTIMATES - SURFACE WATER

PLANT TYPE % ILE FACILITY STREAM FLOW (MLD) STREAM CONC. ( μ g/l)

Harmonic

Mean 30Q5 7Q10 1Q10 Harmonic Mean 30Q5 7Q10 1Q10

ALL 50 125.56 44.02 26.80 22.53 4.62E-02 0.13 0.22 0.26

ALL 10 11.11 1.94 1.06 0.96 0.52 2.99 5.47 6.04

DRINKING WATER AND FISH IN GESTION EXPOSURE ESTIMATES

Exposure Units Drinking Water Results Drinking Water Units Fish Ingestion Results Fish Ingestion

Units 50% 10% 50% 10%

Cancer

LADD pot 9.87E-10 1.12E-08 mg/kg/day 0.00 0.00 mg/kg/day

LADC pot 5.06E-08 5.72E-07 mg/L 0.00 0.00 mg/kg

Acute

ADR pot 1.10E-05 2.50E-04 mg/kg/day 0.00 0.00 mg/kg/day

SIC Code Comments:
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-14-00619-CR

Rudy MARTINEZ,

Appellant

v.

The State of 

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 216th Judicial District Court, Gillespie County, Texas

Trial Court No. 4957

Honorable Stephen B. Ables, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARION, JUSTICE ANGELINI, AND JUSTICE PULLIAM

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment revoking 

Appellant’s deferred adjudication is AFFIRMED.

SIGNED October 14, 2015.

_____________________________

Jason Pulliam, Justice
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 24, 2005

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 04-70029

_____________________

JUSTIN WILEY DICKENS,

Petitioner - Appellant

 v.

DOUG DRETKE, DIRECTOR, TEXAS 

DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE,

INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,

Respondent - Appellee

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

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Northern District of Texas

(2:00-CV-0110-J)

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

Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Petitioner-Appellant Justin Wiley Dickens seeks a

certificate of appealability (“COA”) on three issues that the

district court deemed unworthy of collateral review. Dickens

seeks a COA from this Court on three claims, all of which

challenge his death sentence. Dickens first argues that the

evidence at the punishment phase of trial was legally

insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he would
1 —— U.S. ——, 125 S. Ct. 1183 (2005).

2

commit criminal acts of violence in the future so as to

constitute a continuing threat to society. Dickens also argues

that his state trial, appeal, and habeas counsel were ineffective

because they failed to invoke the International Covenant on Civil

and Political Rights, an international treaty ratified by the

United States Senate which prohibits the execution of offenders

for crimes committed when the offender was under the age of 18.

In light of the United States Supreme Court’s recent

decision in Roper v. Simmons,

1 Texas Governor Rick Perry has

commuted Dickens’s death sentence to life imprisonment. As

Dickens petition for a COA challenges only his death sentence,

and not his underlying conviction, his petition is now moot

because Governor Perry has granted him the relief that he

requested.

PETITION DISMISSED.
Donald SCHUBERT, Appellant, v. GAINESVILLE COUNCIL ON AGING, INC., Appellee.

No. 1D17-680

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 6, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Loan
      Agreement

    


    Signing
      Place: Xi’an City

    


    Party
      A:
      Shaanxi Tianren Organic Food Co., Ltd.

    Party
      B:
      Shaanxi Hede Venture Capital Management Co., Ltd.

    


    Accordance
      with the principle of honesty, mutual trust, making compensation for equal
      value, after consistently consulted with each other, the parties hereto agree
      and are compliant with that:

    


    
      	
              1.

            	
              After
                friendly consultation with each other, Party A agrees to lend Party
                B RMB
                Seven
                million.

            


    

    
      	
              2.

            	
              Term
                of Loan: from June 6, 2007 to June 5,
                2008.

            


    

    
      	
              3.

            	
              Party
                B guarantees to pay off the whole loan within three business days
                after
                the loan is due.

            


    

    
      	
              4.

            	
              Others
                not stated herein should be resolved through consultation between
                both
                parties. If negotiation is unable to resolve, litigate to the jurisdiction
                of the People’s Court, which is located in the place where the agreement
                is signed.

            


    

    
      	
              5.

            	
              This
                agreement is promptly effective since both parties sign and seal
                on it.
                This agreement is one form, two copies, with each party holds
                one.

            


    

     

    
      	
              Party
                A (sealed): Shaanxi Tianren Organic 

            	 	
              Party
                B (Sealed): Shaanxi Hede Venture Capital

            
	
              Food
                Co., Ltd.

            	 	
              Management
                Co., Ltd.

            
	 	 	 
	
              Trustee
                of Party A (Signature): Xue Hongke

            	 	
              Trustee
                of Party B (Signature): Zhang Jing

            
	
               

            	 	 
	
              June
                5, 2007

            	 	
              June
                5, 2007
EXHIBIT 31.2
**CERTIFICATIONS**
I, James T. House, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Tarpon Industries, Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) forthe registrant and have:
a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;
b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;and
c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who havea significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
Date: April 15, 2005                                                                           /s/ JAMES T. HOUSE   James T. House, Senior Vice   President and Chief FinancialOfficer
Allen PULLEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-3193

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed December 26, 2017 Rehearing Denied March 1, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 

 

I,Masakazu Kurushima, certify that 

 

1. I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q of California Steel Industries, Inc. (the “Registrant”); 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

 

4. The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and we have: 

 

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the Registrant, includingits consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

 

(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

 

(c) disclosed in this report any change in the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theRegistrant’s most recent fiscal year that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

 

5. The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internalcontrol over financial reporting, to the Registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of Registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): 

 

(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controlsover financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

 

(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the Registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting. 

 

Date: October 28, 2005
Exhibit 32






CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002










Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter  ended March 31, 2010 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








This 11 day of May, 2010/s/ David D. StovallChief Executive Officer/s/ Annette BanksChief Financial Officer