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



Exhibit 99.1

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

Thomas E. Jones, as Chief Executive Officer of CHAD Therapeutics, Inc. (the
Company), and Earl L. Yager, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, that

(1)  the Companys Quarterly Report of Form 10-Q for the quarterly period
ended December 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) 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.

|                        |  |                                                                   
|----------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: February 6, 2003 |  | /S/ Thomas E. Jones                                               
|                        |  |                                                                   
|                        |  | Thomas E. Jones
Chief Executive Officer
Of
CHAD Therapeutics, Inc.
|                        |  |                                                                   
|Dated: February 6, 2003 |  | /S/Earl L. Yager                                                  
|                        |  |                                                                   
|                        |  | Earl L. Yager
Chief Financial Officer
Of
CHAD Therapeutics, Inc.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 121 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 121

Expressing the sense of Congress that July 22 should be designated as a 
    day of recognition to recognize the unsung heroes of America in 
                                wartime.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 22, 2024

 Mr. Van Drew submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
       referred to the Committee on Oversight and Accountability

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Expressing the sense of Congress that July 22 should be designated as a 
    day of recognition to recognize the unsung heroes of America in 
                                wartime.

Whereas a great number of Americans have been overlooked for too many years who 
        have contributed to the efforts in wartime by remaining home to work in 
        factories and mills producing sails, uniforms, ammunition, and other 
        essential materials;
Whereas America has done a great job in honoring our war heroes, but has largely 
        neglected to commemorate those behind the scenes; and
Whereas we should take this day to remember all of those who supported our 
        troops throughout American history off the battlefield supporting the 
        efforts to defend our freedom and democracy: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of Congress that the President should designate a 
day of recognition to recognize the unsung heroes of America in 
wartime.
                                 <all>
```
[No. 37288-2-I.

Division One.

August 25, 1997.]

#### Maria Rosas, *Appellant,*v. Ivar’s, Inc., *Respondent.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 94-2-06733-8, George A. Finkle, J., entered August 4, 1995. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Baker, C.J., concurred in by Coleman and Agid, JJ.
INTERNATIONAL LEASE FINANCE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
     COMPUTATION OF RATIOS OF EARNINGS FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED
                        MARCH 31, 1998 AND 1997 
                       (DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS)

<TABLE>
<S>                                      <C>              <C>
                                                1998           1997 
                                          -----------     ------------
                                                    (Unaudited)       
Earnings:
Net Income                                $   85,162       $   55,428
  Add:
    Provision for income taxes                46,758           30,543
    Fixed charges                            186,444          172,600
  Less:
    Capitalized interest                      14,579           11,953
                                          -----------      ------------
  Earnings as adjusted (A)                $  303,785       $  246,618
                                          -----------      ------------

Preferred dividend requirements           $    4,334       $    4,085
Ratio of income before provision
    for income taxes to net income               155%            155%
                                          -----------      ------------
  Preferred dividend factor on pretax
    basis                                      6,718            6,332
                                          -----------      ------------
Fixed Charges:
  Interest expense                           150,633          147,437
  Capitalized interest                        14,579           11,953
  Interest factor of rents                    21,232           13,210
                                          -----------      ------------
  Fixed charges as adjusted (B)              186,444          172,600
                                          -----------      ------------

Fixed charges and preferred stock
    dividends (C)                         $  193,162       $  178,932
                                          -----------      ------------

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
    (A) divided by (B)                         1.63x            1.43x         
                                          -----------      ------------

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
    and preferred stock dividends
    (A) divided by (C)                         1.57x            1.38x         
                                          -----------      ------------
</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) CAUSE NO. 1:15-cr-00034-TLS-SLC

)

TODD J. GREEN )

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

UPON A PLEA OF GUILTY

TO: THE HONORABLE THERESA L. SPRINGMANN, JUDGE, 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Upon Defendant’s request to enter a plea of guilty pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal

Rules of Criminal Procedure, this matter came on for hearing before U.S. Magistrate Judge

Susan Collins, on February 19, 2016, with the written consents of Defendant, counsel for

Defendant, and counsel for the United States of America.

The hearing on Defendant’s plea of guilty was in full compliance with Rule 11, Federal

Rules of Criminal Procedure, before the Magistrate Judge in open court and on the record.

In consideration of that hearing and the statements made by Defendant under oath on

the record and in the presence of counsel, the remarks of the Assistant United States Attorney

and of counsel for Defendant,

I FIND as follows:

(1) that Defendant understands the nature of the charge against him to which the plea is

offered;

(2) that Defendant understands his right to trial by jury, to persist in his plea of not

guilty, to the assistance of counsel at trial, to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses,
and his right against compelled self-incrimination;

(3) that Defendant understands what the maximum possible sentence is, including the

effect of the supervised release term, and Defendant understands that the Sentencing Guidelines

apply and that the Court may depart from those guidelines under some circumstances;

(4) that the plea of guilty by Defendant has been knowingly and voluntarily made and is

not the result of force or threats or of promises apart from the plea agreement between the

parties;

(5) that Defendant is competent to plead guilty;

(6) that Defendant understands that his answers may later be used against him in a

prosecution for perjury or false statement;

(7) that there is a factual basis for Defendant’s plea; and further,

I RECOMMEND that the Court accept Defendant’s plea of guilty and that Defendant

be adjudged guilty of the offense charged in Count 2 of the three-count Indictment, and have

sentence imposed. A Presentence Report has been ordered. Should this Findings and

Recommendation be accepted and Defendant adjudged guilty, sentencing will be scheduled

before Judge Theresa L. Springmann by separate order and notice. Objections to the Findings

and Recommendation are waived unless filed and served within fourteen (14) days. 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(B).

DATED this 19th day of February 2016.

/s/ Susan Collins 

Susan Collins

United States Magistrate Judge

2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) CAUSE NO. 1:15-cr-5-TLS-SLC

)

CHARLEY GONZALEZ, IV )

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

UPON A PLEA OF GUILTY

TO: THE HONORABLE THERESA L. SPRINGMANN, JUDGE, 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Upon Defendant’s request to enter a plea of guilty pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules

of Criminal Procedure, this matter came on for hearing before U.S. Magistrate Susan Collins, on

June 9, 2015, with the written consents of the Defendant, counsel for the Defendant, and counsel

for the United States of America.

The hearing on Defendant’s plea of guilty was in full compliance with Rule 11, Federal

Rules of Criminal Procedure, before the Magistrate Judge in open court and on the record.

In consideration of that hearing and the statements made by the Defendant under oath on

the record and in the presence of counsel, the remarks of the Assistant United States Attorney and

of counsel for Defendant,

I FIND as follows:

(1) that Defendant understands the nature of the charge against him to which the plea is

offered;

(2) that the Defendant understands his right to trial by jury, to persist in his plea of not

guilty, to the assistance of counsel at trial, to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses, and
his right against compelled self-incrimination;

(3) that the Defendant understands what the maximum possible sentence is, including the

effect of the supervised release term, and Defendant understands that the Sentencing Guidelines

apply and that the Court may depart from those guidelines under some circumstances;

(4) that the plea of guilty by the Defendant has been knowingly and voluntarily made and

is not the result of force or threats or of promises apart from any plea agreement between the

parties;

(5) that Defendant is competent to plead guilty;

(6) that the Defendant understands that his answers may later be used against him in a

prosecution for perjury or false statement;

(7) that there is a factual basis for the Defendant’s plea; and further,

I RECOMMEND that the Court accept the Defendant’s plea of guilty and that the

Defendant be adjudged guilty of the offense charged in Count 2 of the two-count Indictment, and

have sentence imposed. A Presentence Report has been ordered. Should this Findings and

Recommendation be accepted and the Defendant adjudged guilty, sentencing will be scheduled

before Judge Theresa L. Springmann by separate order and notice. Objections to the Findings

and Recommendation are waived unless filed and served within fourteen (14) days. 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(B).

DATED this 9th day of June, 2015.

s/ Susan Collins 

Susan Collins

United States Magistrate Judge

2
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 204 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 204

 To amend the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act to restore 
audit funds under the Child and Adult Care Food Program to 1.5 percent 
           from 1 percent for fiscal years 2005 through 2007.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 2005

 Mr. Serrano introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act to restore 
audit funds under the Child and Adult Care Food Program to 1.5 percent 
           from 1 percent for fiscal years 2005 through 2007.

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

SECTION 1. CHILD AND ADULT CARE FOOD PROGRAM AUDIT FUNDS.

    Section 17(i) of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act 
(42 U.S.C. 1766(i)) is amended by striking ``(except, in the case of 
each of fiscal years 2005, 2006, and 2007, 1 percent)''.
                                 <all>
```
Elijah JACKSON, Jr., petitioner, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al.

No. 12-8885.

Supreme Court of the United States

Aug. 12, 2013.

Petition for rehearing denied.
2021 Risk Review | 65

Acronyms and Abbreviations

ADC Acquisition, Development, and Construction

C&D Construction and Development

C&I Commercial and Industrial

Call Report Consolidated Reports of Condition and Income

CLO Collateralized Loan Obligation

CRE Commercial Real Estate

E&P Exploration and Production

FDIC Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

FHLB Federal Home Loan Bank

GDP Gross Domestic Product

KBW Keefe, Bruyette, and Woods (Bank Index)

LCD Leveraged Commentary and Data (S&P)

NASDAQ National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotations (Market Index)

NIM Net Interest Margin

PDNA Past-Due and Nonaccrual

PPP Paycheck Protection Program

S&P Standard and Poor’s

SNC Shared National Credit

USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture

VIX CBOE Volatility Index
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v John McGauley, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Archie Gorfinkel, J.), rendered on April 25,1984, unanimously affirmed.

Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted. *(See, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Saunders,*52 AD2d 833.) We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous points which could be raised on this appeal. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Asch, Bloom, Milonas and Ellerin, JJ.
Read the magazine story to   find out more.A test plot of finger millet
    Finger millet uses less water than corn and sorghum and could be a good  source of cattle feed.For further reading
    USDA Scientist Helps Texas Sorghum Growers Reduce Water Use
      Two Approaches for Optimizing Water Productivity
      USDA Irrigation Research: Good to the Last Drop **Saving Water in  Southern High Plains Dairy Production** By Dennis  O’Brien
June 6, 2016 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) scientists are  trying to save water in one of the fastest growing dairy regions in the United  States by encouraging use of a drought-tolerant crop the same way it’s  sometimes used in India—as cattle feed. Dairy production is growing fast in the Southern High  Plains region of West Texas and New Mexico, and most of the dairy producers there use corn silage or  alfalfa as a key feed component. Corn  and alfalfa require more water than other crops, thus stretching the Ogallala  Aquifer, the source of water for that region, beyond capacity. Prasanna Gowda, an Agricultural Research Service (ARS)  engineer, knew that dairy cattle in his native India are raised on finger  millet (*Eleusine  coracana*) and that milk from finger millet-fed cows  there sells for a higher price. As part of their research, Gowda and his colleagues grew  five finger millet varieties in Bushland for 120 days, selecting plants of each  variety based on crude protein, fiber content, and other nutritional qualities.  They compared the finger millet’s nutritional qualities to those of corn and sorghum  from neighboring plots. Gowda found that finger millet had higher levels of  potassium than corn, twice as much calcium, four to five times as much  phosphorus, and comparable levels of protein, fiber and total digestible  nutrients. (Calcium and phosphorus deficiencies reduce dairy cattle’s appetites  and growth and lower milk production.) Finger millet also used less water than  corn and sorghum. The one drawback was that finger millet produced lower yields  than corn. The results showed that finger millet could be a  viable feed source for dairy cattle as a supplement to corn and that it could help  save water in areas where water is limited, Gowda says. Gowda was based in Bushland, Texas at the time of the  study, but has since moved to the ARS Grazinglands Research Laboratory in El  Reno, Oklahoma. ARS is USDA’s principal intramural scientific research  agency. Read more about this research in the June 2016 issue of *AgResearch* magazine.
USDC IN/ND case 3:15-cv-00442-JVB-MGG document 16 filed 05/31/16 page 1 of 2
USDC IN/ND case 3:15-cv-00442-JVB-MGG document 16 filed 05/31/16 page 2 of 2
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-20322 Conference Calendar

ERIC VICTOR ESTEVES, also known as Zetheary A. Reed, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus COUNTY OF HARRIS; HARRIS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT, Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. CA-H-94-1715

- - - - - - - - - - December 10, 1996 Before WIENER, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Eric Victor Esteves, Texas prisoner # 517832, appeals from the judgment of the district court dismissing his civil rights action as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). He argues that the appellees were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs by failing to create a procedure for treating nicotine-addicted inmates as part of their policy to banNo. 96-20322 - 2 - smoking in the Harris County Jail. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Esteves can present no legal points arguable on their merits, and the appeal is frivolous. See Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). Because the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. Rule 42.2. We caution Esteves that any additional frivolous appeals filed by him will invite the imposition of sanctions. To avoid sanctions, Esteves is further cautioned to review any pending appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are frivolous.
APPEAL DISMISSED. SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
#### The People of the State of New York, Appellant, v Robert Cesare, Respondent.

Appeal by the People, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the County Court, Nassau County (Santagata, J.), dated August 3, 1984, as granted that branch of defendant’s motion which sought to vacate a judgment of the same court, rendered September 19, 1980, convicting him of grand larceny in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Order reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, defendant’s motion to the extent that it was to vacate the judgment of conviction denied, judgment reinstated and the matter is remitted to the County Court, Nassau County, for further proceedings *(see, People v Salvato,*111 AD2d 773). Weinstein, J. P., Rubin, Lawrence and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

HAMMOND DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CAUSE NO.: 2:15-cr-96-JTM-JEM

 )

RICHARD BALDERAS, )

Defendant. ) 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

UPON A PLEA OF GUILTY BY DEFENDANT RICHARD BALDERAS

TO: THE HONORABLE JAMES T. MOODY,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Upon Defendant Richard Balderas’s request to enter a plea of guilty pursuant to Rule 11 of

the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, this matter came for hearing before Magistrate Judge John

E. Martin on April 26, 2016, with the consent of Defendant Balderas, counsel for Defendant

Balderas, and counsel for the United States of America.

The hearing on Defendant Balderas’s plea of guilty was in full compliance with Federal Rule

of Criminal Procedure 11 before the Magistrate Judge in open court and on the record.

In consideration of that hearing and the statements made by Defendant Balderas under oath

on the record and in the presence of counsel, the remarks of the Assistant United States Attorney and

of counsel for Defendant Balderas,

I FIND as follows:

(1) that Defendant Balderas understands the nature of the charge against him to which the

plea is offered;

(2) that Defendant Balderas understands his right to trial by jury, to persist in his plea of not

guilty, to the assistance of counsel at trial, to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses, and his
right against compelled self-incrimination;

(3) that Defendant Balderas understands what the maximum possible sentence is, including

the effect of the supervised release term, and Defendant Balderas understands that the sentencing

guidelines apply and that the Court may depart from those guidelines under some circumstances;

(4) that the plea of guilty by Defendant Balderas has been knowingly and voluntarily made

and is not the result of force or threats or of promises;

(5) that Defendant Balderas is competent to plead guilty;

(6) that Defendant Balderas understands that his answers may later be used against him in

a prosecution for perjury or false statement;

(7) that there is a factual basis for Defendant Balderas’s plea; and further,

I RECOMMEND that the Court accept Richard Balderas’s plea of guilty to the offense

charged in Count 1 of the Indictment and that Defendant Balderas be adjudged guilty of the offense

charged in Count 1 of the Indictment and have sentence imposed. A Presentence Report has been

ordered. Should this Report and Recommendation be accepted and Defendant Balderas be adjudged

guilty, sentencing before Senior Judge James T. Moody will be set at a later date by separate order. 

Objections to the Findings and Recommendation are waived unless filed and served within fourteen

(14) days. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

So ORDERED this 26th day of April, 2016.

s/ John E. Martin 

MAGISTRATE JUDGE JOHN E. MARTIN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

cc: All counsel of record

Honorable James T. Moody