alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AO 450 (Rev. 01/09) Judgment in a Civil Action 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the 

Northern District of Indiana 

LORRAINE CAPPELLO, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly 

situated; Case No. 3:16-cv-290; JEFFREY O'BARSKI, on behalf of themselves 

and all others similarly situated; Case No. 3:16-cv-290; JEAN L. JEWETT, 

on behalf of herself, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated; 

Case No. 3:16-cv-591, on behalf of Franciscan Alliance Inc Pension Security Plan; 

LENORE R OWENS, on behalf of herself, individually, and on behalf of all others 

similarly situated, on behalf of Franciscan Alliance Inc Pension Security Plan; and 

LORI L BUKSAR, on behalf of herself, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly 

situated, on behalf of Franciscan Alliance Inc Pension Security Plan 

 Plaintiffs 

 v. 

 Civil Action No. 3:16-cv-290 

FRANCISCAN ALLIANCE, INC., an Indiana non-profit Corporation; 

Case No. 3:16-cv-290 and Case No. 3:16-cv-591; FRANCISCAN ALLIANCE PENSION 

AND BENEFITS COMMITTEE, Case No. 3:16-cv-290; JOHN DOES 1 – 20, 

Case No. 3:16-cv-290; THE PENSION COMMITTEE FOR THE FRANCISCAN ALLIANCE 

PENSION SECURITY PLAN, CASE NO. 3:16-CV-591 (Termed: 09/01/2017); 

JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-20, Case No. 3:16-cv-591 (Termed: 09/01/2017); 

JOHN AND JANE DOES 21-40, Case No. 3:16-cv-591 (Termed: 09/01/2017); MEMBERS OF 

THE PENSION COMMITTEE FOR THE FRANCISCAN ALLIANCE PENSION SECURITY 

PLAN, each an individual; Case No. 3:16-cv-591 (Termed: 09/01/2017); BOARD OF 

TRUSTEES OF FRANCISCAN ALLIANCE, INC.; and JOHN DOES 21-40 

 Defendants 

 v. 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Case No. 3:16-cv-591 

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL ACTION

The court has ordered that (check one): 

 the plaintiff________________________________________________________________________ 

recover from the defendant the amount of_____________ 

dollars $ , which includes prejudgment interest at the rate of % plus postJudgment interest at the rate of % along with costs. 

 the plaintiff recover nothing, the action is dismissed on the merits, and the defendant____________ 

recover costs from the plaintiff . 

USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00290-RLM-MGG document 210 filed 10/19/20 page 1 of 2
AO 450 (Rev. 01/09) Judgment in a Civil Action 

 X Other: This case is DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to the stipulation of dismissal and Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). 

This action was (check one): 

 tried to a jury with Judge presiding, and the jury has 

rendered a verdict. 

 tried by Judge without a jury and the above decision was 

reached. 

 X decided by Judge Robert L. Miller, Jr. on a Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice. 

DATE: 10/19/2020 ROBERT N. TRGOVICH, CLERK OF COURT 

 by s/ B. Scheumann c

 Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk 

USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00290-RLM-MGG document 210 filed 10/19/20 page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 32.2

  CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER REGARDING PERIODIC REPORT CONTAINING
 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, C. Troy Woodbury,  Jr., the Chief  Financial  Officer of Wegener  Corporation
(the "Company"),  in compliance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  hereby certify that, to the
best of my  knowledge,  the  Company's  Quarterly  Report  on Form  10-Q for the
quarter ended May 28, 2004 (the "Report") filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission:

      o     fully  complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
            the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      o     the  information  contained in the Report  fairly  presents,  in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company.

                                          /s/ C. Troy Woodbury, Jr.
                                          --------------------------------------
                                  NAME:   C. TROY WOODBURY, JR.
                                  TITLE:  TREASURER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                                          (PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER)
                                  DATE:   JULY 9, 2004
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1784 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1784

              To suspend temporarily the duty on Tetrakis.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 21, 2005

 Mr. Jenkins introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
              To suspend temporarily the duty on Tetrakis.

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

SECTION 1. TETRAKIS.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.04.54       Tetrakis(2,4-di-   Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         tert-butylphenyl)                                                  31/2008
                         4,4'-
                         biphenyldiphosphi
                         nate (CAS No.
                         38613-77-3)
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         2931.00.90)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) apply to 
articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2390 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to equalize the exclusion 

from gross income of parking and transportation fringe benefits and 

to provide for a common cost-of-living adjustment, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 17, 2005 

Mr. MCGOVERN (for himself and Mr. SHAYS) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Government Reform, 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 amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to equalize 

the exclusion from gross income of parking and transportation fringe benefits and to provide for a common costof-living adjustment, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Commuter Benefits 

5 Equity Act of 2005’’. 
2 

•HR 2390 IH 

1 SEC. 2. UNIFORM DOLLAR LIMITATION FOR ALL TYPES OF 

2 TRANSPORTATION FRINGE BENEFITS. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 132(f)(2) of the Internal 

4 Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to limitation on exclusion) 

5 is amended— 

6 (1) by striking ‘‘$100’’ in subparagraph (A) 

7 and inserting ‘‘$200’’, and 

8 (2) by striking ‘‘$175’’ in subparagraph (B) 

9 and inserting ‘‘$200’’. 

10 (b) INFLATION ADJUSTMENT CONFORMING AMEND11 MENTS.—Subparagraph (A) of section 132(f)(6) of the In12 ternal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to inflation adjust13 ment) is amended— 

14 (1) by striking the last sentence, 

15 (2) by striking ‘‘1999’’ and inserting ‘‘2008’’, 

16 and 

17 (3) by striking ‘‘1998’’ and inserting ‘‘2007’’. 

18 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

19 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

20 December 31, 2004. 

21 SEC. 3. CLARIFICATION OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEE BENEFITS. 

22 Section 7905 of title 5, United States Code, is 

23 amended— 

24 (1) in subsection (a)— 

25 (A) in paragraph (2)(C) by inserting 

26 ‘‘and’’ after the semicolon; 
3 

•HR 2390 IH 

1 (B) in paragraph (3) by striking ‘‘; and’’ 

2 and inserting a period; and 

3 (C) by striking paragraph (4); and 

4 (2) in subsection (b)(2)(A) by amending sub5 paragraph (A) to read as follows: 

6 ‘‘(A) a qualified transportation fringe as 

7 defined in section 132(f)(1) of the Internal Rev8 enue Code of 1986;’’. 

Æ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

JAMES L. PHILLIPS, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CAUSE NO. 1:16-CV-296-PPS-SLC

)

MIDSTATES CONCRETE, )

)

Defendant. )

OPINION AND ORDER

Phillips brought this action by filing a complaint containing only one line

alleging, “[T]hey stole my Dirt.” [DE 1.] Midstates Concrete filed a motion to dismiss

this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the complaint is completely

devoid of any information that would indicate that this Court has jurisdiction over

Phillips’ allegation. [DE 6.] For a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 12(b)(1), I will accept well-pleaded factual allegations as true and will draw

any reasonable inferences in favor of the plaintiff. Ctr. for Dermatology & Skin Cancer,

Ltd. v. Burwell, 770 F.3d 586, 588 (7th Cir. 2014) (quoting Iddir v. I.N.S., 301 F.3d 492, 496

(7th Cir. 2014). However, the plaintiff is responsible for “establishing that the

jurisdictional requirements have been met.” Id. When the court lacks subject-matter

jurisdiction, it “should proceed no further than determining whether to dismiss or

transfer the case.” Baker v. Kingsley, 387 F.3d 649, 656 (7th Cir. 2004).

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 mandates that a pleading must contain “a short
and plain statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction.” Phillips’ complaint is

devoid of such a statement. District courts have original jurisdiction over all civil

actions where there is: 1) a federal question; or 2) diversity of citizenship and an

amount in controversy exceeding $75,000. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331-1332. To involve a

federal question, the action must arise under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the

United States. See 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Here, Phillips does not identify any provision in the

Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States under which his action arises. Again,

his complaint contains only a single line alleging the Midstates Concrete stole his dirt. 

Because Phillips fails to allege any federal right or law that Midstates Concrete violated,

he fails to establish federal question jurisdiction.

District courts also “have original jurisdiction over all civil actions where the

matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and

costs, and is between . . . citizens of different states.” 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). A corporation

is a citizen of its state of incorporation and the state where it has its principal place of

business. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1). Here, Phillips has neither alleged the citizenship of

either party, nor alleged any amount of damages for which he seeks relief. Thus,

Phillips fails to establish diversity jurisdiction. 

Because Phillips failed to establish that the Court has subject matter jurisdiction

over his allegation, I must dismiss this action pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1).

ACCORDINGLY: 

The Court GRANTS Midstates Concrete’s Motion to Dismiss [DE 6]. This action 

is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
SO ORDERED.

ENTERED: October 7, 2016

_s/ Philip P. Simon

PHILIP P. SIMON, CHIEF JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                              EXHIBIT 11
                               COMPAQ COMPUTER CORPORATION
                  STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS


                                                          Six months         Quarter 
                                                        ended June 30,    ended June 30,
                                                       ----------------  ----------------
                                                        1997      1996    1997      1996
                                                       -------  -------  -------  -------
                                                             (in millions, except
                                                               per share amounts)
<S>                                                    <C>      <C>      <C>      <C>
PRIMARY EARNINGS PER SHARE

Shares used in computing earnings per share:
     Weighted average number of shares outstanding      687.1    670.5    689.0    671.8
     Incremental shares attributed
           to outstanding options                        22.5     20.5     22.5     20.0
                                                       -------  -------  -------  -------
                                                        709.6    691.0    711.5    691.8
                                                       =======  =======  =======  =======

Earnings:
     Net income                                        $  601   $  501   $  214   $  267
                                                       =======  =======  =======  =======

Earnings per common and common equivalent share        $  .85   $  .73   $  .30   $  .39
                                                       =======  =======  =======  =======


EARNINGS PER SHARE ASSUMING FULL
     DILUTION

Shares used in computing earnings per share:
     Weighted average number of shares outstanding      687.1    670.5    689.0    671.8
     Incremental shares attributed to
           Outstanding options                           24.9     22.0     23.4     21.0
                                                       -------  -------  -------  -------
                                                        712.0    692.5    712.4    692.8
                                                       =======  =======  =======  =======

Earnings:
     Net income                                        $  601  $   501   $  214  $   267
                                                       =======  =======  =======  =======

Earnings per common and common equivalent share        $  .84   $  .72   $  .30   $  .39
                                                       =======  =======  =======  =======
<FN>

Note: All share and earnings per share information reflects a 5-for-2 stock split
effective July 28, 1997.

</TABLE>
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED DECEMBER 22, 2022

NO. 03-21-00319-CV

William Cyree, Appellant

v.

Kimberley Kay Cyree, Appellee

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 3 OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES GOODWIN, BAKER, AND TRIANA

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE GOODWIN

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the trial court on April 13, 2021. Having 

reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error 

in the trial court’s judgment. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment. The 

appellant shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and in the court below.
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 13

- 00186

- CV

JUAN FRANCISCO CASTRO

v. MARIVEL CASTRO
On Appeal from the 28th District Court of Nueces County , Texas Trial Cause No. 2010

- DCV

- 4548

- A

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed . The Court orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED . Costs of the appeal are adjudged against appellant.
We further order this decision certified below for observan ce. July 31 , 2014
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNIrpo SIarBs DIsrruCT C

for the

Northern District of Indiana

TRUSTEES OF THE TEAMSTERS UNION NO. 142

PENSION FUND. et al.

Plaintiff?)

V,

UNDERGROUND INCORPORATED

Civil Action 2:16-cv-11

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVN ACTION

T o : 1D efiendant's name and addre s s) U nd ergrou nd I ncorporated

c/o Richard A, Boyd, Registered Agent

5253 Liverpool Road

Hobart, lN 463421

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) 

- 

or 60 days if you

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.

P . 12 (a)(2) or (3 ) 

- 

you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule I 2 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff s attorney,

whose name and address are: Teresa A. Massa, Attorney

1 158 W. Lincolnway, Suite 2

Valparaiso, lN 46385

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint.

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

$ignature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

Date:

USDC IN/ND case 2:16-cv-00011-JVB-PRC document 1-2 filed 01/12/16 page 1 of 1
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2243 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2,6 Dichlorotoluene. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 10, 2005 

Mr. SPRATT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2,6 

Dichlorotoluene. 

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

3 SECTION 1. 2,6 DICHLOROTOLUENE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.32.82 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 2,6 Dichlorotoluene) is amended by striking ‘‘12/31/2006’’ 

7 and inserting ‘‘12/31/2008’’. 

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

9 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 
2 

•HR 2243 IH 

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

2 the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ
Exhibit 31.2**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302****OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002****FOR THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**I, John M. Hughes, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2006,of Alion Science and Technology Corporation; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 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 ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures 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) [Paragraph reserved in accordance with SEC transition instructions contained in SECRelease 34-47986]  c) 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 suchevaluation; and  d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): 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 whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: December 1, 2006         By:  */s/ John M. Hughes*   Name: John M. Hughes  Title: Chief Executive Officer  
115
**Read the magazine story to find out   more.**A database of foods that contain sodium added during preparation helps public health officials track sodium-reduction efforts.
Click the image for more information about
it.For further reading
Quick-Serve Foods Slow To Change
Assessing the U.S. Population's Sodium Intake
Snacking Associated with Increased Calories, Decreased Nutrients Sodium Monitoring Key to Reducing Dietary Intakes By Rosalie Marion Bliss
January 6, 2016 Over 90 percent of the U.S. population consumes more than the recommended daily maximum amount of sodium, most of which comes from commercially processed and restaurant foods. Reducing sodium in these foods is key to lowering the amount in the U.S. diet. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) scientists and collaborators have launched an online dataset of key foods that contain sodium added during preparation or processing, prior to purchase by consumers. Researchers in USDA's Agricultural Research Service (ARS) Nutrient Data Laboratory (NDL) in Beltsville, Maryland, have been working on the project to monitor key high-sodium foods since 2010. Collaborators include the ARS Food Surveys Research Group, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The ARS laboratories are part of the Beltsville Human Nutrition Research Center. The foods being monitored serve as indicators for assessing changes over time in the sodium content of common sodium-contributing commercial foods, according to NDL nutritionist Jaspreet Ahuja, who heads the project at ARS. Foods included in the dataset are commonly reported as eaten by survey respondents during the national food-intake survey called "What We Eat in America." The nutrient content of the foods is tracked year-to-year and also at intervals using objective, nationwide sampling and laboratory analyses to gauge important nutrient content changes, including reformulations. To establish a baseline, all foods in the database were sampled and chemically analyzed between 2010 and 2013. Researchers observed a wide range of sodium levels among foods studied. For example, among canned tomatoes, some had 4.5 times more sodium than others. Among foods categorized as savory snacks and crackers, plain tortilla chips had one-quarter the sodium of hard pretzels. Most of the foods sampled (88 percent) from fast-food outlets or restaurants exceeded the "healthy" FDA sodium limit. Public health officials can use the information to track sodium reduction efforts, and consumers and health professionals can use the information to make educated food choices. The dataset is available on the NDL home page and may be found here. ARS is USDA's chief intramural scientific research agency. Read more about this work in the January 2016 issue of *AgResearch*.