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

|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | (i)      the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended      June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the      date hereof (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of section      13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;  and |
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         |
|   | (ii)      the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the      Company.                                                                                                                                                     |

|                |            |                                 |
|---------------------|-----------------|--------------------------------------|
|                | By:        | /s/      MATTHEW FROST               |
|                |            | Matthew      Frost                   |
|                |            | Interim      Chief Executive Officer |
|                |            | On2      Technologies, Inc.          |
|                |            |                                 |
| August      7, 2009 |            |                                 |
Case 1:07-cv-05300-AKH Document 22 Filed 10/11/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05300-AKH Document 22 Filed 10/11/2007 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05730-BSJ Document 12-14 Filed 07/23/2007 Page 1 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-05730-BSJ Document 12-14 Filed 07/23/2007 Page 2 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-05730-BSJ Document 12-14 Filed 07/23/2007 Page 3 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-05730-BSJ Document 12-14 Filed 07/23/2007 Page 4 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-05730-BSJ Document 12-14 Filed 07/23/2007 Page 5 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-05730-BSJ Document 12-14 Filed 07/23/2007 Page 6 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-05730-BSJ Document 12-14 Filed 07/23/2007 Page 7 of 7
#### KANSAS CITY SOUTHERN RY. CO. v. MAYNOR et al.

(Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

December 8, 1913.)

No. 2,528.

Limitation oe Actions (§ 2*)—What Law Governs—Actions for Tort.

Rev. Civ. Code La. art. 3536, providing that actions for offenses or quasi offenses shall be prescribed by one year, affects the remedy primarily; and while it may extinguish the right of action in Louisiana at the expiration of one year, it is not apxdicable in the courts of another state, *612to which the injured party has lawfully removed while the right of action in Louisiana subsisted.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Limitation of Actions, Cent. Dig. §§ 4—8; Dec. Dig. § 2.*]

In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Texas; Gordon Russell, Judge.

Action- at law by G. C. Maynor and another against the Kansas City Southern Railway Company. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant brings error.

Affirmed.

W. L. Estes and John J. King, both of Texarkana, Tex., for plaintiff in error.

Cone Johnson and Jas. M. Edwards, both of Tyler, Tex., and J. H. Beavers, of Winnsboro, Tex., for defendants in error.

Before PARDEE and SHEEBY, Circuit Judges, and CALL, District Judge.

*

For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes

PER CURIAM.

Under the undisputed facts in this case, Mrs. Maynor, at the time she received her injuries, was more than a mere licensee on board the train of the railway company. She was a quasi employé of the railway company by consent and in its interest, and was entitled to protection from injury through negligence of the railway company.

The statute of Louisiana, providing that actions for offenses and quasi offenses- shall be prescribed by one year (R. C. C. La. art. 3536), affects the remedy primarily; and while it may extinguish the right in Louisiana at the expiration of one year, it is not applicable in the courts of another state, to which the injured party has lawfully removed while the right of action in Louisiana subsisted. For authorities, see 25 Cyc. 1020, 1021.

Judgment affirmed.
Case 1:07-cv-01548-AKH     Document 5      Filed 09/05/2007     Page 1 of 1
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

March 26, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

135021 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 135021 

 COA: 268264 

Kent CC: 04-009942-FC 

RUDOLPH JEROME HORTON,

Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, leave to appeal was granted, 480 Mich 987 (2007), and this 

case was placed on the April 2008 session calendar for argument and submission. It now 

appears to this Court that the case of Melendez-Diaz v Massachusetts, __ US __; 76 

USLW 3496; 2008 US LEXIS 2537 (March 17, 2008), is pending before the United 

States Supreme Court and that the decision in that case may resolve an issue raised in the 

present case. We ORDER that this case be held in ABEYANCE pending the decision in 

that case. 

p0326 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

March 26, 2008 

 Clerk
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 865 

To convey the New River State Park campground located in the Mount 

Rogers National Recreation Area in the Jefferson National Forest in 

Carroll County, Virginia, to the Commonwealth of Virginia, and for 

other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 4, 2009 

Mr. BOUCHER (for himself and Mr. GOODLATTE) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions 

as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To convey the New River State Park campground located 

in the Mount Rogers National Recreation Area in the 

Jefferson National Forest in Carroll County, Virginia, 

to the Commonwealth of Virginia, 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, 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
2 

•HR 865 IH

1 SECTION 1. LAND CONVEYANCE, MOUNT ROGERS NA2 TIONAL RECREATION AREA, JEFFERSON NA3 TIONAL FOREST, VIRGINIA. 

4 (a) CONVEYANCE REQUIRED.—The Secretary of Ag5 riculture shall convey, without consideration, to the Com6 monwealth of Virginia, all right, title, and interest of the 

7 United States in and to the federally owned land under 

8 jurisdiction of the Secretary consisting of the approxi9 mately 78.15 acres (and all buildings and amenities within 

10 those acres) located in the Mount Rogers National Recre11 ation Area in the Jefferson National Forest in Carroll 

12 County, Virginia, as generally depicted on the map enti13 tled ‘‘Potential Conveyance of the New River Campground 

14 to the Commonwealth of Virginia’’ and dated May 1, 

15 2008. 

16 (b) DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY.—The exact acreage 

17 and legal description of the land to be conveyed under sub18 section (a) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory 

19 to the Secretary. The cost of the survey and all other costs 

20 incurred by the Secretary to convey the land shall be borne 

21 by the Commonwealth of Virginia. 

22 (c) CONDITION OF CONVEYANCE.—The conveyance 

23 authorized under subsection (a) shall be subject to the 

24 condition that the Commonwealth of Virginia accept the 

25 real property described in such subsection in its condition 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
3 

•HR 865 IH

1 at the time of conveyance (commonly known as conveyance 

2 ‘‘as is’’). 

3 (d) ADDITIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—The 

4 Secretary may require such additional terms and condi5 tions in connection with the conveyance under subsection 

6 (a) as the Secretary considers appropriate to protect the 

7 interests of the United States. 

Æ 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
# CE2010184EN.01018901.xml

| 8.7.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 184/189 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.7.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 184/189

---

Wednesday 22 April 2009Internal market in natural gas ***II

P6_TA(2009)0244

European Parliament legislative resolution of 22 April 2009 on the Council common position for adopting a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning common rules for the internal market in natural gas and repealing Directive 2003/55/EC (14540/2/2008 – C6-0021/2009 – 2007/0196(COD))

2010/C 184 E/50

(Codecision procedure: second reading)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

having regard to the Council common position (14540/2/2008 – C6-0021/2009),

having regard to its position at first reading (1) on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2007)0529),

1

having regard to Article 251(2) of the EC Treaty,

having regard to Rule 62 of its Rules of Procedure,

having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A6-0238/2009),

| 1. | Approves the common position as amended; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Approves the common position as amended;

| 2. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.

---

(1)  Texts adopted, 9.7.2008, P6_TA(2008)0347.

1

---

Wednesday 22 April 2009P6_TC2-COD(2007)0196

Position of the European Parliament adopted at second reading on 22 April 2009 with a view to the adoption of Directive 2009/.../EC of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning common rules for the internal market in natural gas and repealing Directive 2003/55/EC

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position at second reading corresponds to the final legislative act, Directive 2009/73/EC.)

---
Exhibit 31.1 

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, J. William Grimes, Chief Executive Officer of i3 Mobile, Inc., certify that: 

 

1.    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of i3 Mobile, Inc.; 

 

2.    Based on my knowledge, this report does not containany 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;

 

3.    Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.    The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

 

a)    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures,or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

 

b)    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

 

c)    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

 

5.    The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

 

a)    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the 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 who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date:    November 12, 2003
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA

No. 15-1407

Filed May 25, 2016

STATE OF IOWA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

vs.

DAWN MARIE LIENAU,

Defendant-Appellant.

________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cedar County, Marlita A. Greve, 

Judge.

A defendant appeals her conviction alleging her counsel was ineffective. 

AFFIRMED.

Jeffrey L. Powell of the Law Office of Jeffrey L. Powell, Washington, for 

appellant.

Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Martha E. Trout, Assistant 

Attorney General, for appellee.

Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.
2

VOGEL, Presiding Judge.

Dawn Lienau pled guilty to driving while barred. She appeals her 

conviction asserting her counsel provided ineffective assistance. She claims by 

pleading guilty she is now prohibited from challenging an evidentiary ruling of the 

court that allowed the State to admit her certified driving record into evidence in 

lieu of live testimony from an employee of the department of transportation to 

prove she was barred from operating a motor vehicle. She claims counsel knew 

she wanted to appeal the district court’s ruling, and thus, counsel should not 

have advised her to plead guilty. It is her belief that counsel simply did not 

recognize the legal implications of pleading guilty. She asks that we vacate her 

conviction and allow her to withdraw her guilty plea based on counsel’s 

ineffectiveness. 

Our review of an ineffective-assistance claim is de novo. State v. 

Tompkins, 859 N.W.2d 631, 636 (Iowa 2015). To prove a claim of ineffective 

assistance of counsel, Lienau must prove counsel failed to perform an essential 

duty and this failure resulted in prejudice. See id. at 637. Such claims can be 

resolved on either prong. Id. In addition, we will not hold counsel ineffective if 

the action the defendant claims counsel should have taken would have been 

meritless. Id. In light of the supreme court’s ruling in State v. Shipley, 757 

N.W.2d 228, 234, 238 (Iowa 2008) (concluding neither the hearsay rules nor the 

Confrontation Clause prevented the admission of a certified driving record), we 

conclude any appellate challenge to the district court’s evidentiary ruling in this 

case would have been meritless. See also State v. Kennedy, 846 N.W.2d 517, 

525 (Iowa 2014) (“[T]he certified abstract of [defendant’s] driving record . . . is not 
3

testimonial and the admission of these two pages did not violate the 

Confrontation Clauses of the United States or Iowa Constitutions.”). Thus, 

counsel was not ineffective in advising Lienau to plead guilty. 

AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit31.1**

** **

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**RULE 13a – 14(a)**

 

I, Stephen W. Bershad,certify that:

 

1.               I have reviewedthis Form 10-K of Axsys Technologies, Inc.

 

2.               Based on my knowledge, this report does not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary in order to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;

 

Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.               The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:

 

a.               Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly reportis being prepared;

 

b.              Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;

 

c.               Disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarterin the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and

 

4.               The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and Ihave disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofthe registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

a.               All significant deficiencies and material weaknessesin the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting whichare reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize, and report financial information; and

 

b.              Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.

 
| March 4, 2004            |
|--------------------------|
|                     |
|                     |
|                     |
| /s/ Stephen W.  Bershad  |   |
| Stephen W. Bershad       |
| Chief Executive  Officer |

 

----
Slip Op. 99-86

UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE

BEFORE: SENIOR JUDGE NICHOLAS TSOUCALAS

___________________________________

:

TRANSCOM, INC., :

:

Plaintiff, :

:

L & S BEARING COMPANY, :

:

Plaintiff-Intervenor, :

:

v. : Court No. 97-01-00037

:

UNITED STATES, :

:

Defendant, :

:

THE TIMKEN COMPANY, :

:

Defendant-Intervenor. :

___________________________________:

O R D E R

In accordance with the decision (June 16, 1999) and mandate

(Aug. 9, 1999) of the United States Court of Appeals for the

Federal Circuit, Appeal No. 98-1401, it is hereby

ORDERED that the judgment and order of this Court in Transcom,

Inc. v. United States, 22 CIT __, 5 F. Supp. 2d 984 (1998), is

vacated; and it is further

ORDERED that this case is remanded to the United States

Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration
Court No. 97-01-00037 Page 2

(“Commerce”), to refund to Transcom, Inc. antidumping duty deposits

made in excess of the 2.96% “all others” rate established in the

initial investigation on tapered roller bearings (“TRBs”) that it

obtained from unnamed exporters of TRBs from the People’s Republic

of China during the fourth, fifth and sixth administrative reviews

of the antidumping duty order.

______________________________

NICHOLAS TSOUCALAS

 SENIOR JUDGE

Dated: August 20, 1999

New York, New York
##### In this section

              - Codes and standards (5)
              - CRR (10)
              - Events (4)
              - Leadership (8)
              - Wildfire and WUI (16)
              - Planning (11)
              - Data (8)
              - EMS (16)
              - Equipment and technology (17)
              - Fire investigation (6)
              - Funding (5)
              - Hazmat (14)
              - Health and safety (38)
              - Terrorism (4)
              - Training (6)

Current Issues

- Events
- Leadership
The U.S. Fire Administration celebrates Black History Month

Current Issues

- Codes and standards
- CRR
- Data
- EMS
- Equipment and technology
- Events
- Fire investigation
- Funding
- Hazmat
- Health and safety
- Leadership
- Planning
- Terrorism
- Training
- Wildfire and WUI
America Burning: 50 years of fire safety and prevention

Current Issues

- Codes and standards
- CRR
- Data
- EMS
- Equipment and technology
- Events
- Fire investigation
- Funding
- Hazmat
- Health and safety
- Leadership
- Planning
- Terrorism
- Training
- Wildfire and WUI
EMR - ISAC: Making vital, timely, actionable emergency services sector information easily accessible

Current Issues

- Events
- Leadership
Celebrating Pride Month
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 85 

To provide permanent relief from the marriage penalty under the Internal 

Revenue Code of 1986. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 6, 2009 

Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida introduced the following bill; which was 

referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To provide permanent relief from the marriage penalty under 

the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. 

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 ‘‘Marriage Tax Penalty 

5 Permanent Elimination Act of 2009’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REPEAL OF SUNSET ON MARRIAGE PENALTY RE7 LIEF. 

8 Title IX of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Rec9 onciliation Act of 2001 (relating to sunset of provisions 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2 

•HR 85 IH

1 of such Act) shall not apply to sections 301, 302, and 303 

2 of such Act (relating to marriage penalty relief). 

Æ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
Exhibit 32.2
 CAPITAL
PROPERTIES, INC. AND CONSOLIDATED AFFILIATES
Certification Pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as Adopted Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  (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/ Barbara J. DreyerBarbara J. Dreyer, Treasurerand Principal
Financial OfficerMarch 17,
2011