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

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2310

To suspend temporarily the duty on 1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic Acid, Polymer 

With N,N′-Bis(2-Aminoethyl)–1,2-Ethanediamine, Cyclized, Me Sulfates. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 11, 2005

Mr. WILSON of South Carolina introduced the following bill; which was 

referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL

To suspend temporarily the duty on 1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic 

Acid, Polymer With N,N′-Bis(2-Aminoethyl)–1,2-

Ethanediamine, Cyclized, Me Sulfates.

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

3 SECTION 1. 1,4-BENZENEDICARBOXYLIC ACID, POLYMER 

4 WITH N,N′-BIS(2-AMINOETHYL)–1,2-

5 ETHANEDIAMINE, CYCLIZED, ME SULFATES. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

7 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

8 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

9 new heading:
2

•HR 2310 IH 

‘‘ 9902.08.04 1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic 

Acid, Polymer With N,N′-

Bis(2-Aminoethyl)–1,2-

Ethanediamine, Cyclized, Me 

Sulfates (CAS No. 68187–

22–4) (provided for in subheading 3908.90.70) ............ Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2008 ’’. 

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

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

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

4 the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WAYMO LLC,

Plaintiff,

 v.

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 17-00939 WHA

ORDER AFTER HEARING RE

DISCOVERY LETTER DATED

APRIL 3, 2017

As stated on the record at the hearing yesterday concerning plaintiff Waymo LLC’s

discovery letter dated April 3, 2017 (Dkt. No. 135), defendants shall use Waymo’s 15 search

terms to again search all officers, directors, employees, and servers that have already been

searched using defendants’ 120 search terms. Defendants shall then use both Waymo’s 15

search terms and defendants’ 120 search terms to search ten additional officers, directors, or

employees of Waymo’s choosing. Finally, defendants shall use both Waymo’s 15 search terms

and defendants’ 120 search terms to search the remainder of defendants’ servers and any

officers, directors, or employees that have anything to do with defendants’ LiDAR technology. 

The aforementioned searches shall first prioritize the top 50 most important files and documents

identified by Waymo from among the 14,000-plus allegedly downloaded by Anthony

Levandowski. After searching for those 50 files and documents, defendants shall repeat the

aforementioned searches for the remainder of the 14,000-plus.

The foregoing discovery shall be completed by APRIL 14 AT 5:00 P.M.

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 163 Filed 04/06/17 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

For the reasons stated on the record, the Court DEFERS ruling on other issues remaining

in this discovery dispute and raised at the hearing yesterday until after the hearing today on Mr.

Levandowski’s motion.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 6, 2017. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 163 Filed 04/06/17 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 32.2

Certification of CFO 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 on Form 10-Q of AMCORE Financial, Inc. (the
"Company") for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Donald H. Wilson, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his 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 results of operations of the Company.



|                                                       
|-------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Donald H. Wilson                                   
|Donald H. Wilson President and Chief Operating Officer,
|Chief Financial Officer                                
|November 9, 2007                                       

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not,
except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement required by § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to AMCORE Financial, Inc. and will be retained by AMCORE Financial, Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 13

- 00259

- CV

IN RE ALLIANCE ANEST HESIA ASSOCIATES, P.A., GE NE VERTKIN, M.D., & WEN DI CABANO, R.N. RELATORS

------------
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

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

### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1

------------
The court has considered “R elators Motion To Dismiss As Moot Relators ’

Petition For Writ Of Mandamus ,” and is of the opinion that the petition should be
dismissed as moot. Accordingly, relators’ petition for writ of mandamus is

dismissed as moot.

PER CUR IAM
PANEL: GABRIEL, GARDNER, and MEIER, JJ.

DELIVERED : August 2 9 , 2013

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4, 52.8 (d).
S. 384 

One Hundred Twelfth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE FIRST SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday, 

the fifth day of January, two thousand and eleven 

An Act 

To amend title 39, United States Code, to extend the authority of the United 

States Postal Service to issue a semipostal to raise funds for breast cancer research. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF POSTAGE STAMP FOR BREAST CANCER 

RESEARCH. 

Section 414(h) of title 39, United States Code, is amended 

by striking ‘‘2011’’ and inserting ‘‘2015’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
**Exhibit 99.1**

 

## **CERTIFICATION**

 

 

The undersigned certifypursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, that:

 

(1) The accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period endedJuly 31, 2002, 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 accompanying Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 

 
| Date:  October 28, 2002 |   | /s/ Timothy J. Dodd     |
|------------------------------|--------|-------------------------|
|                         |   | President and           |
|                         |   | Chief Executive Officer |
|                         |   |                    |
|                         |   |                    |
|                         |   |                    |
| Date:  October 28, 2002 |   | /s/ Thomas P. Friezen   |
|                         |   | Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
#### Charles F. BYRD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 78-3181.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Dec. 1, 1980.

*1159ize or delimit the claims which may be made in the federal litigation. At best, defendants appear to be addressing themselves to the discretionary question of whether the court should stay the federal proceedings pending final determination of the State action. Klein v. Walston & Co., 432 F.2d 936 (2 Cir. 1970); C. Wright, Federal Courts § 52-at 205 (2d ed. 1970). Not only is this question not properly before the court on this motion, but plaintiffs assert that the causes of action in the State court are wholly distinct from those pending here. The court must therefore conclude that the plaintiff may properly demand a jury trial.

Defendants’ alternative motion is to dismiss the complaint as to all but one of the defendants on the grounds that they lack the capacity to be sued, not being “persons” within the meaning of § 1983. In sole support of this, defendants point to two allegations of the complaint describing the defendants’ official positions and responsibilities as demonstrating that the suit is being brought against the defendants in their official capacities rather than as “persons,” and thus is not within the ambit of the term “persons” as used in §§ 1983, 1985 and 1986. This contention may be quickly disposed of. The same argument was rejected by this court in Manfredonia v. Barry, 336 F.Supp. 765 (E.D.N.Y.1971), wherein a similar complaint was upheld:

> The action is brought solely against individual officials who, under color of their respective positions in the County, are alleged to have engaged in acts which plaintiffs claim were in violation of their civil rights. The description in the complaint of defendants’ official positions does not transform the action into one against the County. Indeed, in order to establish that defendants were acting “under color of law”, a recitation of their governmental status would seem to be essential. *Id.*at 768.

Accordingly, the court must conclude that defendants’ motion must be denied in all respects.

So ordered.
EXHIBIT32.1

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

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Home Director, Inc. (the"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarterended March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the "Report"),I, Michael D. Liddle, President and Chief Executive Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to myknowledge:

(1)    The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and

(2)    The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the issuer.

|  | /s/Michael Liddle Michael LiddlePresident and ChiefExecutive Officer |
|--|----------------------------------------------------------------------|

May 24,2004

----
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 10.18

IMPCO                                                 Detroit Headquarters
Letterhead                                            35715 Sterling Drive
                                                      Sterling Heights, MI 48312
                                                      Tel:  (810) 819-0800
                                                      Fax:  (810) 979-8910
                                                      www.impcotechnologies.com


                AMENDMENT TO THE LEASE BETWEEN KLEIN INVESTMENTS
                          AND IMPCO TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

Pursuant to Section 12.1 of the lease between Klein Investments and IMPCO
Technologies, IMPCO Technologies Inc. assigns this lease to Quantum
Technologies, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of IMPCO Technologies, as of
October 31, 2000 with the consent of Klein Investments. In return for acceptance
of this assignment IMPCO Technologies, Inc. will guaranty performance of all
terms and conditions under this lease by Quantum Technologies, Inc. to Klein
Investments.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment by their
officers thereunto duly authorized as of the day and year first written above.


IMPCO Technologies, Inc.                     Klein Investments

By: /s/ Don Dominic                          BY: /s/ William A. Klein
    ---------------------------                  --------------------
    Don Dominic, 2-8-2001

TITLE:  VP & Secretary                       TITLE: General Partner
                                                    -----------------


Quantum Technologies, Inc.

BY: /s/ Syed Hussain
    ----------------------


TITLE: President
       -------------------
# C_2008216EN.01001401.xml

| 23.8.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 216/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 216/14

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5239 — Cinven/JOST Holding)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 216/03)

On 31 July 2008, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5239. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu). |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5239. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

---
**Exhibit      31.2**

**COMMUNITY      BANKS, INC.**

**RULE      13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATION**

** (Chief      Financial Officer)**

| Date   | November                9, 2007 |   | /s/                Donald F. Holt        |
|--------|---------------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------|
|   |                            |   | Donald                F. Holt            |
|   |                            |   | Executive                Vice President  |
|   |                            |   | (Chief                Financial Officer) |
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 105 (Thursday, June 1, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 28654]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-13329]



[[Page 28654]]

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Thrift Supervision


American Savings and Loan Association; Appointment of Receiver

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the authority contained in 
section 5(d)(2) of the Home Owners' Loan Act, the Office of Thrift 
Supervision has duly appointed the Resolution Trust Corporation as sole 
Receiver for American Savings and Loan Association, New York, New York, 
OTS No. 4080, on May 5, 1995.

    Dated: May 25, 1995.

    By the Office of Thrift Supervision.
Kimberly M. White,
Corporate Technician.
[FR Doc. 95-13329 Filed 5-31-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6720-01-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                             484
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     1321
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (90)
<INVENTORY>                                      13451
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 15545
<PP&E>                                           14274
<DEPRECIATION>                                  (4516)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   33977
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            16129
<BONDS>                                           5431
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          9
<COMMON>                                          1154
<OTHER-SE>                                       11254
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     33977
<SALES>                                           2585
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  2585
<CGS>                                             2078
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     2078
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  3741
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 454
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (3688)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (3688)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (3688)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.03)
        

</TABLE>
Motion Granted and Order filed June 2, 2016

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 15

- 00959

- CR

____________ JOHN EDWARD THEALL , Appellant

V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 337th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1460903



### ORDER
Appellant’s court

- appointed counsel filed a brief in which s he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Appellant filed a motion to review the record so he
may prepare file a pro se brief. See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Gainous v.
State , 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). The motion is GRANTED

. Accordingly, we direct the Judge of the 337th District Court to afford appellant an opportunity to view the trial record in accordance with local procedure; that the clerk of that court furnish the record to appellant on or before June 17, 2016 ; that the clerk of thatcourt certify to this court the date on wh ich delivery of the record to appellant is made; and

that appellant file his pro se brief with this court within thirty days of that date.

PER CURIAM
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

I, Scott A. Montgomery, certify that:

 

1.I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of NationalMercantile Bancorp;

 

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

 

3.Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the smallbusiness issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsiblefor establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as definedin Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small businessissuer and have:

 

(a) Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

(b) Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and

 

(c) Disclosedin this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer’s fourth fiscal quarter in thecase of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likelyto materially affect, the small business issuer’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and

 

5.The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the small business issuer’s auditors and the audit committee ofthe small business issuer’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):

 

(a) Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the small business issuer’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and

 

(b) Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the small business issuer’s internal control overfinancial reporting.

 

 
| DATE:  | May 19, 2006       |   | /s/   SCOTT A. MONTGOMERY |   |
|--------|-------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Scott A. Montgomery     |
|   | Chief Executive Officer |

 

1

----
BHE 12.31.14 EX 10.10








EXHIBIT 10.10


SUMMARY OF KEY TERMS OF COMPENSATION ARRANGEMENTS
 WITH BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY ENERGY COMPANY 
 NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS


Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company's ("BHE") continuing named executive officers each receive an annual salary and participate in health insurance and other benefit plans on the same basis as other employees, as well as certain other compensation and benefit plans described in BHE's Annual Report on Form 10-K. 


The named executive officers are also eligible to receive a cash incentive award under BHE's Performance Incentive Plan ("PIP"). The PIP provides for a discretionary annual cash award that is determined on a subjective basis and paid in December. In addition to the PIP, the named executive officers are eligible to receive discretionary cash performance awards periodically during the year to reward the accomplishment of significant non-recurring tasks or projects. Mr. Gregory E. Abel has not been granted discretionary cash performance awards in the past five years. Messrs. Patrick J. Goodman and Douglas L. Anderson and Ms. Maureen E. Sammon are participants in BHE's Long-Term Incentive Partnership Plan ("LTIP"). Mr. Abel does not participate in the LTIP. A copy of the LTIP is attached as Exhibit 10.9 to the BHE Annual Report on Form 10-K. Mr. Abel is a participant in BHE's Incremental Profit Sharing Plan ("IPSP"). Messrs. Goodman and Anderson and Ms. Sammon do not participate in the IPSP. A copy of Mr. Abel's IPSP is incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the BHE Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013. 


Base salary for continuing named executive officers for BHE's fiscal year ending December 31, 2015, is shown in the following table:
	
				
	Name and Title
	Base Salary

	Gregory E. Abel
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
	$
	1,000,000
	


	Patrick J. Goodman
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
	$
	460,000
	


	Douglas L. Anderson
Executive Vice President and General Counsel
	$
	350,000
	


	Maureen E. Sammon
Senior Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer
	$
	270,000
	







Mr. Abel is a director of BHE, but does not receive additional compensation for his service as a director other than what he receives as an employee of BHE. The other members of the BHE board of directors do not receive compensation for their service as directors.