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

|   | (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. |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                |                                         |                    |
|-------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------|-------------------------|
|                                | TEARLAB CORP.                                |
|                                |                                         |                    |
| Date:   November 12, 2010 | By:                                | /s/ Elias Vamvakas |
|                                |  Chairman & Chief Executive Officer |

----
Exhibit 31.2 

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 

PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 

I, Christopher Guthrie, certify that: 

| 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Comstock Holding Companies, Inc.; and |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 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 the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report. |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Date: May 29, 2020

 

|                                                                                                              |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| /s/ Christopher Guthrie                                                                                 |
| Christopher Guthrie

Chief Financial Officer

(Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer) |
I 

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 73 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that amounts 

paid for an abortion are not taken into account for purposes of the 

deduction for medical expenses. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 3, 2025 

Mr. BIGGS of Arizona (for himself, Mr. ALLEN, Mr. MOORE of Alabama, and 

Mr. JOYCE of Pennsylvania) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 

that amounts paid for an abortion are not taken into 

account for purposes of the deduction for medical expenses. 

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 ‘‘Abortion Is Not Health 

5 Care Act of 2025’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 73 IH

1 SEC. 2. AMOUNTS PAID FOR ABORTION NOT TAKEN INTO 

2 ACCOUNT IN DETERMINING DEDUCTION FOR 

3 MEDICAL EXPENSES. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 213 of the Internal Rev5 enue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the 

6 following new subsection: 

7 ‘‘(f) AMOUNTS PAID FOR ABORTION NOT TAKEN

8 INTO ACCOUNT.—An amount paid during the taxable year 

9 for an abortion shall not be taken into account under sub10 section (a).’’. 

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

12 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

13 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
Case 4:03-cv-00277-Y Document 8 Filed 04/14/03 Page 1 of 23 PageID 50
Case 4:03-cv-00277-Y Document 8 Filed 04/14/03 Page 2 of 23 PageID 51
Case 4:03-cv-00277-Y Document 8 Filed 04/14/03 Page 3 of 23 PageID 52
Case 4:03-cv-00277-Y Document 8 Filed 04/14/03 Page 4 of 23 PageID 53
Case 4:03-cv-00277-Y Document 8 Filed 04/14/03 Page 5 of 23 PageID 54
Case 4:03-cv-00277-Y Document 8 Filed 04/14/03 Page 6 of 23 PageID 55
Case 4:03-cv-00277-Y Document 8 Filed 04/14/03 Page 7 of 23 PageID 56
Case 4:03-cv-00277-Y Document 8 Filed 04/14/03 Page 8 of 23 PageID 57
Case 4:03-cv-00277-Y Document 8 Filed 04/14/03 Page 9 of 23 PageID 58
Case 4:03-cv-00277-Y Document 8 Filed 04/14/03 Page 10 of 23 PageID 59
Case 4:03-cv-00277-Y Document 8 Filed 04/14/03 Page 11 of 23 PageID 60
Case 4:03-cv-00277-Y Document 8 Filed 04/14/03 Page 12 of 23 PageID 61
Case 4:03-cv-00277-Y Document 8 Filed 04/14/03 Page 13 of 23 PageID 62
Case 4:03-cv-00277-Y Document 8 Filed 04/14/03 Page 14 of 23 PageID 63
Case 4:03-cv-00277-Y Document 8 Filed 04/14/03 Page 15 of 23 PageID 64
Case 4:03-cv-00277-Y Document 8 Filed 04/14/03 Page 16 of 23 PageID 65
Case 4:03-cv-00277-Y Document 8 Filed 04/14/03 Page 17 of 23 PageID 66
Case 4:03-cv-00277-Y Document 8 Filed 04/14/03 Page 18 of 23 PageID 67
Case 4:03-cv-00277-Y Document 8 Filed 04/14/03 Page 19 of 23 PageID 68
Case 4:03-cv-00277-Y Document 8 Filed 04/14/03 Page 20 of 23 PageID 69
Case 4:03-cv-00277-Y Document 8 Filed 04/14/03 Page 21 of 23 PageID 70
Case 4:03-cv-00277-Y Document 8 Filed 04/14/03 Page 22 of 23 PageID 71
Case 4:03-cv-00277-Y Document 8 Filed 04/14/03 Page 23 of 23 PageID 72
# C_2016175EN.01002501.xml

| 17.5.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 175/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.5.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 175/25

---

Action brought on 22 March 2016 — Tulliallan Burlington v EUIPO — Burlington Fashion (BURLINGTON THE ORIGINAL)

(Case T-121/16)

(2016/C 175/29)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Tulliallan Burlington Ltd (St Helier, Jersey) (represented by: A. Norris, Barrister)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Burlington Fashion GmbH (Schmallenberg, Germany)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Applicant:

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark containing the word elements ‘BURLINGTON THE ORIGINAL’ – International registration designating the European Union No 1 007 952

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Procedure before EUIPO

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 January 2016 in Case R 2501/2013-4

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision and reject the contested mark in respect of all of the contested goods; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision and reject the contested mark in respect of all of the contested goods;

| — | order the payment of the costs incurred by the applicant in connection with this appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the payment of the costs incurred by the applicant in connection with this appeal.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Articles 8(5), 8(4) and 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Articles 8(5), 8(4) and 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
STATE of Louisiana v. Phillip SMITH

NO. 2018-KO-1959

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 15, 2019

Denied.
Exhibit 15.1





REVIEW REPORT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS





To the Board of Directors and


Stockholders of Ribapharm Inc:





We have reviewed the accompanying condensed balance sheet
of Ribapharm Inc. as of March 31, 2002 and the related condensed statements of income and of cash flows for each of the three-month periods ended March 31, 2002 and 2001. These condensed financial statements are the responsibility of the
Companys management.





We conducted our review in accordance with standards established by the American Institute of Certified
Public Accountants. A review of interim financial information consists principally of applying analytical procedures to financial data and making inquiries of persons responsible for financial and accounting matters. It is substantially less in
scope than an audit conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, the objective of which is the expression of an opinion regarding the financial statements taken as a whole. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.





Based on our review, we are not aware of any material modifications that should be made to the accompanying condensed interim financial
statements for them to be in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.





We previously
audited in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, the balance sheet as of December 31, 2001, and the related statements of income of stockholders equity and of cash flows for the year then ended (not
presented herein), and in our report dated March 8, 2002, except for Note 1 as it relates to the recapitalization, as to which the date is April 10, 2002, we expressed an unqualified opinion on those financial statements. In our opinion, the
information set forth in the accompanying condensed balance sheet as of December 31, 2001, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the balance sheet from which it has been derived.





/s/PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP





PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP


Los Angeles, California


May 24, 2002
Michael J. MILLS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-2960

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[February 7, 2019]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

*Affirmed.*
```

[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 22 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
H. Res. 22

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                       January 9, 2025.
    Resolved, That the following named Members be, and are hereby, elected to 
the following standing committees of the House of Representatives:
     Committee on Appropriations: Mr. Hoyer, Ms. Kaptur, Mr. Clyburn, Mr. Bishop 
of Georgia, Ms. McCollum, Ms. Wasserman Schultz, Mr. Cuellar, Ms. Pingree, Mr. 
Quigley, Ms. Meng, Mr. Pocan, Mr. Aguilar, Ms. Lois Frankel of Florida, Mrs. 
Watson Coleman, Mrs. Torres of California, Mr. Case, Mr. Espaillat, Mr. Harder 
of California, Ms. Underwood, Ms. Lee of Nevada, Mr. Morelle, Mr. Levin, Ms. 
Dean of Pennsylvania, Ms. Escobar, Mr. Mrvan, Ms. Perez, Mr. Ivey.
     Committee on Energy and Commerce: Ms. DeGette, Ms. Schakowsky, Ms. Matsui, 
Ms. Castor of Florida, Mr. Tonko, Ms. Clarke of New York, Mr. Ruiz, Mr. Peters, 
Mrs. Dingell, Mr. Veasey, Ms. Kelly of Illinois, Ms. Barragan, Mr. Soto, Ms. 
Schrier, Mrs. Trahan, Mrs. Fletcher, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, Mr. Auchincloss, Mr. 
Carter of Louisiana, Mr. Mullin, Mr. Landsman, Ms. McClellan.
     Committee on Financial Services: Ms. Velazquez, Mr. Sherman, Mr. Meeks, Mr. 
David Scott of Georgia, Mr. Lynch, Mr. Green of Texas, Mr. Cleaver, Mr. Himes, 
Mr. Foster, Mrs. Beatty, Mr. Vargas, Mr. Gottheimer, Mr. Vicente Gonzalez of 
Texas, Mr. Casten, Ms. Pressley, Ms. Tlaib, Mr. Torres of New York, Ms. Garcia 
of Texas, Ms. Williams of Georgia, Ms. Pettersen, Mr. Fields, Ms. Bynum, Mr. 
Liccardo.
     Committee on Ways and Means: Mr. Doggett, Mr. Thompson of California, Mr. 
Larson of Connecticut, Mr. Davis of Illinois, Ms. Sanchez, Ms. Sewell, Ms. 
DelBene, Ms. Chu, Ms. Moore of Wisconsin, Mr. Boyle of Pennsylvania, Mr. Beyer, 
Mr. Evans of Pennsylvania, Mr. Schneider, Mr. Panetta, Mr. Gomez, Mr. Horsford, 
Ms. Plaskett, Mr. Suozzi.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
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  Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002 (18 U.S.C.  350), the undersigned, Joseph Skeehan, Chief Executive Officer of JMG Exploration, Inc. (the "Company") has executed this certification in connection with the  filing  with  the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  of the  Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 (the "Report").  The undersigned certifies 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 operation of the Company.  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the 30th day of November 2007.   JMG EXPLORATION, INC.  /s/   Joseph Skeehan Name: Joseph Skeehan Title: Chief Executive Officer
Maria KAZOURIS, Petitioner, v. The CITY OF TARPON SPRINGS, Respondent.

Case No. 2D18-3327

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 8, 2019

Denied.
---

Exhibit 13.2 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the annual report on Form 20-F of Madison Minerals Inc. (the “Company”) for the year ended October 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I hereby 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 annual 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 annual report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  Date: April 11, 2012  “Ian Brown”Ian BrownChief Financial Officer


---
Ossie THOMAS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-3756

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed February 12, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Opinion filed August 24 , 2023



### In The 

# Eleventh Court of Appeals

_____ _

_____ 

### No. 11

- 23

- 00156

- CR

_____ _

_____ 

### DAVID ANDREW JACKSON, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 358th District Court Ecto r County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. D

- 21

- 1753

- CR

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N Appellant, David Andrew Jackson , filed a pro se notice of appeal from the trial court’s order of dismissal in this cause

. We dismiss the appeal. When this appeal was docketed, t he clerk of this court wrote Appellant and informed him tha t it did not appear that Appellant’s notice of appeal related to a final appealable order

. We requested that Appellant respond and show gro unds to continue the appeal

. Appellant has responded, but he has not shown grounds upon which this appeal may continue.2 A n appellate court has jurisdiction to consider an appeal by a criminal defendant from a final judgment of conviction or as otherwise authorized by law

. Abbott v. State , 271 S.W.3d 694, 6 96

– 97 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008)

. Appellant’s notice of appeal relates to the trial court’s order dismissing cause number D

- 21

- 1753

- CR based on the State’s motion. In its motion, the Stat e requested that the trial court dismiss the criminal action pending against Appellant because he had been sentenced to forty

- six months in federal prison by the United States District Court for the District of Wyoming. Because the trial court’s order dis missing Appellant’s case is not a n appealable order and an appeal is not otherwise authorized by law, we do not have jurisdiction to address Appellant’s appeal

. Munguia v. State , No. 11

- 1 8

- 00059

- CR, 2018 WL 1546233, at *1 (Tex. App.

— Eastland 2018, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) ; McCray v. State , No. 01

- 12

- 00969

- CR, 2013 WL 6047614 , at *1 (Tex. App.

— Houston [1st Dist.] Nov. 14, 2013,

no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication). Accordingly, w e dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

W. STACY TROTTER JUSTICE

August 24 , 2023 Do not publish. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b). Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J., Trotter , J., and Will i ams , J.
EX PARTE Antonio Deon REED

1160952 (CR-16-0296)

Supreme Court of Alabama.

September 15, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Cert. denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 50 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

119th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 H. R. 50

   To prohibit grants provided under section 106 of the Housing and 
Community Development Act of 1974 from being used to assist persons who 
 are neither a national of the United States nor lawfully admitted for 
              permanent residence, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 3, 2025

Mr. Biggs of Arizona (for himself, Mr. Ogles, Mr. Crane, and Mrs. Luna) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                           Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To prohibit grants provided under section 106 of the Housing and 
Community Development Act of 1974 from being used to assist persons who 
 are neither a national of the United States nor lawfully admitted for 
              permanent residence, 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 ``Keeping Aid for Municipalities And 
Localities Accountable Act'' or the ``KAMALA Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON ASSISTANCE FOR PERSONS NOT LAWFULLY PRESENT.

    (a) In General.--Section 105 of the Housing and Community 
Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5305) is amended by adding at the 
end the following:
    ``(i) Prohibition on Use of Assistance for Persons Not Lawfully 
Present.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no amount from a 
grant under section 106 made in fiscal year 2024 or any succeeding 
fiscal year may be used to assist persons who are neither a national of 
the United States nor lawfully admitted for permanent residence under 
section 101(a)(20) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.''.

SEC. 3. PROHIBITION ON GRANTS TO ENTITIES THAT PROVIDE ASSISTANCE TO 
              PERSONS NOT LAWFULLY PRESENT.

    Section 103 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 
(42 U.S.C. 5303) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``The Secretary is authorized to'' and 
        inserting:
    ``(a) In General.--The Secretary is authorized to''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
    ``(b) Limitation.--The Secretary may not make a grant to any State, 
unit of general local government, or Indian tribe to carry out 
activities in accordance with the provisions of this title if such 
State, unit of general local government, or Indian tribe carries out 
any housing or community development related program that provides 
assistance to persons who are neither a national of the United States 
nor lawfully admitted for permanent residence under section 101(a)(20) 
of the Immigration and Nationality Act.''.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2021310EN.01002302.xml

| 2.8.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 310/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.8.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 310/23

---

Judgment of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — Chanel v EUIPO — Innovative Cosmetic Concepts (INCOCO)

(Case T-196/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark INCOCO - Earlier national word marks COCO - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2021/C 310/29)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Chanel (Neuilly sur-Seine, France) (represented by: J. Passa, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Pétrequin, J. Crespo Carrillo and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Innovative Cosmetic Concepts LLC (Clifton, New Jersey, United States) (represented by: I. Temiño Ceniceros, J. Oria Sousa-Montes and P. Revuelta Martos, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 January 2020 (Case R 194/2019-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Chanel and Innovative Cosmetic Concepts.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 16 January 2020 (Case R 194/2019-1); |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 16 January 2020 (Case R 194/2019-1);

| 2. | Orders EUIPO and Innovative Cosmetic Concepts LLC to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders EUIPO and Innovative Cosmetic Concepts LLC to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 201, 15.6.2020.

---
Erskine James MCKINLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-384

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[March 14, 2019]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.