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

[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 836 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

119th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 836

 To require the Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the Chief of 
  the Forest Service, and the Secretary of the Interior to conduct an 
evaluation with respect to the use of the container aerial firefighting 
                system (CAFFS), and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 31, 2025

Mr. Valadao (for himself and Mr. Costa) introduced the following bill; 
   which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in 
     addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration 
  of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee 
                               concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To require the Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the Chief of 
  the Forest Service, and the Secretary of the Interior to conduct an 
evaluation with respect to the use of the container aerial firefighting 
                system (CAFFS), and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Emergency Wildfire Fighting 
Technology Act of 2025''.

SEC. 2. CONTAINER AERIAL FIREFIGHTING SYSTEM (CAFFS).

    (a) Evaluation.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary 
of the Interior, in consultation with the National Interagency Aviation 
Committee and the Interagency Airtanker Board, shall jointly conduct an 
evaluation of the container aerial firefighting system to assess the 
use of such system to mitigate and suppress wildfires.
    (b) Report.--Not later than 120 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary 
of the Interior, in consultation with the National Interagency Aviation 
Committee and the Interagency Airtanker Board, shall jointly submit to 
the appropriate committees a report that includes the results of the 
evaluation required under subsection (a).
    (c) Appropriate Committees Defined.--In this section, the term 
``appropriate committees'' means--
            (1) the Committees on Agriculture and Natural Resources of 
        the House of Representatives; and
            (2) the Committees on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 
        and Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2018005EN.01002302.xml

| 8.1.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 5/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.1.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 5/23

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen (Sweden) lodged on 24 October 2017 — Skatteverket v Memira Holding AB

(Case C-607/17)

(2018/C 005/31)

Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Referring court

Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Skatteverket

Applicant:

Defendant: Memira Holding AB

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Must account be taken, in the assessment of whether a loss in a subsidiary in another Member State is definitive within the meaning given in, inter alia, the case of A, and the parent company may thus deduct the loss on the basis of Article 49 TFEU, of the fact that, under the rules of the subsidiary’s State, there are restrictions on the possibility for parties other than the party itself which made the loss to deduct the loss? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Must account be taken, in the assessment of whether a loss in a subsidiary in another Member State is definitive within the meaning given in, inter alia, the case of A, and the parent company may thus deduct the loss on the basis of Article 49 TFEU, of the fact that, under the rules of the subsidiary’s State, there are restrictions on the possibility for parties other than the party itself which made the loss to deduct the loss?

A

| 2. | If a restriction such as that referred to in question 1 must be taken into consideration, must account then be taken of whether, in the case in question, there actually is another party in the subsidiary’s State which could have deducted the losses if that were permitted there? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If a restriction such as that referred to in question 1 must be taken into consideration, must account then be taken of whether, in the case in question, there actually is another party in the subsidiary’s State which could have deducted the losses if that were permitted there?

---
Exhibit 32.2

STATEMENT PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

With reference to the Quarterly Report of Cambridge Display Technology, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael Black, Vice-President Finance of the Company,
certify, for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 result of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      
|----------------------
|/s/ MICHAEL BLACK     
|MICHAEL BLACK         
|Vice-President Finance
|November 9, 2006
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-22-00872-CR

The STATE of Texas,

Appellant

v.

Wilter Olivia GOMEZ,

Appellee

From the County Court, Kinney County, Texas

Trial Court No. 12051CR

Honorable Dennis Powell, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ALVAREZ, JUSTICE CHAPA, AND JUSTICE RODRIGUEZ

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s order granting Wilter 

Olivia Gomez habeas relief and dismissing his criminal case with prejudice is AFFIRMED. 

SIGNED November 15, 2023.

_____________________________

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice
Case 4:04-cv-00870-Y Document 14 Filed 02/22/05 Page 1 of 7 PageID 157
 

 Case 4:04-cv-00870-Y Document 14 Filed 02/22/05 Page 2 of 7 PageID 158
 

 Case 4:04-cv-00870-Y Document 14 Filed 02/22/05 Page 3 of 7 PageID 159
 

 Case 4:04-cv-00870-Y Document 14 Filed 02/22/05 Page 4 of 7 PageID 160
 

 Case 4:04-cv-00870-Y Document 14 Filed 02/22/05 Page 5 of 7 PageID 161
 

 Case 4:04-cv-00870-Y Document 14 Filed 02/22/05 Page 6 of 7 PageID 162
 

 Case 4:04-cv-00870-Y Document 14 Filed 02/22/05 Page 7 of 7 PageID 163
STATE of Louisiana v. Walter A. KOTT, Jr.

No. 2018-KH-0745

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 8, 2019

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE TWENTY-SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF ST. TAMMANY**

Writ denied.

Hughes, J., would grant the writ.
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         January 6, 2025.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 20, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 568 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-989, K2025-988.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2024-31732 Filed 1-3-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
EXHIBIT
32.2
 
 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO
 18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350,
 AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 
 In
connection with the Quarterly Report of OccuLogix, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, William G. Dumencu,
Chief Financial 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 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.
 
 A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
 
 
 OCCULOGIX,
      INC.Date
      : November 13,  2009
              By:
              /s/ William
      G. Dumencu
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT JACKSON

Assigned on Briefs July 18, 2001

OUDON PANYANOUVONG v. STATE OF TENNESSEE

 Direct Appeal from the Criminal Court for Rutherford County

No. F-49500 J. S. Daniel, Judge

No. M2000-03152-CCA-R3-PC - Filed November 16, 2001

JOSEPH M. TIPTON, J., concurring

I concur in the majority opinion, except I question whether a post-conviction petitioner has

a right to self-representation at his or her will. In this respect, I view this court’s statements in Cole

v. State, 798 S.W.2d 261, 263 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1990), regarding a common law right to selfrepresentation as dicta; self-representation was certainly not an issue in the appeal. 

I do not believe that a trial court must be required to administer a post-conviction case

through a petitioner who is imprisoned in a distant county and who has no reasonable means to

investigate the case or to conduct pre-hearing business before the court. The fair and efficient

administration of the justice system becomes an important consideration in allowing the trial court

the discretion to have counsel involved, even over a petitioner’s objection. I note that the United

States Supreme Court has concluded that the various states are constitutionally “within their

discretion to conclude that the government’s interests outweigh an invasion of the appellant’s

interest in self-representation” and to prevent self-representation on appeal. Martinez v. Court of

Appeal of Cal., 528 U.S. 152, 163-64, 120 S. Ct. 684, 692 (2000). I believe that a similar weighing

of interests and result exist for post-conviction cases at the trial level.

 

JOSEPH M. TIPTON, JUDGE
STATE of Louisiana v. Michael Anthony LITTLE, Jr.

NO. 2018-KO-1582

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 25, 2019

Denied.
Leon FOSTER, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-3788

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed March 5, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
NOTICE OF CONTINUED HEARING Page 1

Davor Rukavina, Esq.

Texas Bar No. 24030781

Thomas D. Berghman, Esq.

Texas Bar No. 24082683

Julian P. Vasek, Esq.

Texas Bar No. 24070790

MUNSCH HARDT KOPF & HARR, P.C.

500 N. Akard Street, Suite 4000

Dallas, Texas 75201-6659

Telephone: (214) 855-7500

ATTORNEYS FOR SCOTT M. SEIDEL, TRUSTEE

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

In re:

GOODMAN NETWORKS, INC.,

Debtor.

SCOTT M. SEIDEL, TRUSTEE;

GNET ATC, LLC; MULTIBAND

FIELD SERVICES, INC.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

JAMES FRINZI; FRINZI FAMILY TRUST;

MULTIBAND GLOBAL RESOURCES, 

LLC,

Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

Case No. 22-31641-mvl-7

(Chapter 7)

ADVERSARY PROCEEDING

NO: 23-03036

NOTICE OF CONTINUED HEARING

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern 

District of Texas has set a continued hearing on the Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Discovery 

Responses and Production from Defendant Multiband Global Resources, LLC, to be held on 

December 20, 2023 at 1:30 p.m. before the Honorable Michelle V. Larson, United States 

Bankruptcy Judge, at Courtroom No. 2, 14th Floor, Earle Cabell Federal Building, 1100 

Commerce Street, Dallas, Texas 75242.

Case 23-03036-mvl Doc 26 Filed 11/16/23 Entered 11/16/23 11:24:33 Desc Main

Document Page 1 of 2
NOTICE OF CONTINUED HEARING Page 2

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 16th day of November, 2023.

MUNSCH HARDT KOPF & HARR P.C.

/s/ Julian P. Vasek

Davor Rukavina, Esq.

Texas Bar No. 24030781

Thomas D. Berghman, Esq.

Texas Bar No. 24082683

Julian P. Vasek, Esq.

Texas Bar No. 24070790

500 North Akard St., Ste. 4000

Dallas, Texas 75201

Telephone: (214) 855-7500

drukavina@munsch.com

tberghman@munsch.com

jvasek@munsch.com

ATTORNEYS FOR THE PLAINTIFFS

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby certifies that, on this the 16th day of November, 2023, true and 

correct copies of this document were electronically served by the Court’s ECF system on counsel 

for the defendants.

/s/ Julian P. Vasek

Julian P. Vasek, Esq.

4874-6790-1834v.2 013229.00016

Case 23-03036-mvl Doc 26 Filed 11/16/23 Entered 11/16/23 11:24:33 Desc Main

Document Page 2 of 2
|   | (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. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/ Mark      Klein                                                                              |   |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Name: Mark      Klein                                                                            |
| Title:   Chief      Executive Office, President and Director                           |
|                  (Principal Executive Officer) |
|                                                                                                  |
| Date:      May 20, 2009                                                                               |

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK>      0001039189
<NAME>     BRADLEY OPERATING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                      4,747,000
<SECURITIES>                                        0         
<RECEIVABLES>                              15,476,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                2,438,000
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           30,426,000 
<PP&E>                                    678,939,000
<DEPRECIATION>                             40,574,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                            668,791,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      25,361,000
<BONDS>                                   302,710,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                340,720,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>              668,791,000
<SALES>                                    96,115,000 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           97,552,000
<CGS>                                               0         
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              32,410,000 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           24,559,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         16,562,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            31,359,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 0
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                           (4,817,000)
<CHANGES>                                           0 
<NET-INCOME>                               26,542,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    1.18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    1.18
        

</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 31.1****NATIONAL INTERSTATE CORPORATION****SARBANES-OXLEY SECTION 302(a) CERTIFICATIONS**I, Alan R. Spachman, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of National Interstate Corporation;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;  b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and  c. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter 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 mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions): a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likelyto adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.November 8, 2005/s/ Alan R. Spachman
Case 2:03-cv-00131-J Document 19 Filed 09/07/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID 137
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

ABILENE DIVISION

JIMMY MARSHALL, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, )

Commissioner of Social Security, )

) Civil Action No. 1:05-CV-060-C

Defendant. ) ECF

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

 THIS MATTER comes before the court on the Report and Recommendation filed

September 1, 2006 (Doc. 28). Plaintiff filed objections to the Report and Recommendation on

September 12, 2006 (Doc 29). The court has made a de novo determination of the Report and

Recommendation after consideration of Plaintiff’s objections, the submissions of the parties, and

the transcript of the administrative proceedings. 

The court finds the objections to be without merit. The court further finds that the ALJ

applied the correct legal standards and that substantial evidence supports his decision. The court

also finds that the Report and Recommendation applied the correct legal standards

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation is adopted by the

court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the decision of the Commissioner is affirmed and

Plaintiff’s complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

 

 Case 1:05-cv-00060-C Document 30 Filed 09/21/06 Page 1 of 2 PageID 135
2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a judgment in accordance with the terms of this order

shall be entered forthwith.

DATED this 21st day of September, 2006.

_________________________________

SAM R. CUMMINGS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 

 Case 1:05-cv-00060-C Document 30 Filed 09/21/06 Page 2 of 2 PageID 136