alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
December 1, 2011

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

GARY HORNDESKI, M.D., Appellant

NO. 14-11-00975-CV V.

ALVIN G. WILLIAMSON, Appellee

____________________

Today the Court heard the parties’ joint motion to dismiss the appeal from the 

judgment signed by the court below on August 5, 2011. Having considered the motion 

and found it meritorious, we order the appeal DISMISSED.

We further order that each party shall pay its costs incurred by reason of this 

appeal.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

We further order the mandate be issued immediately.
# C_2017168EN.01003102.xml

| 29.5.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 168/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.5.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 168/31

---

Action brought on 5 April 2017 — Senetic v EUIPO — HP Hewlett Packard Group (HP)

(Case T-208/17)

(2017/C 168/41)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Senetic S.A. (Katowice, Poland) (represented by: M. Krekora, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: HP Hewlett Packard Group LLC (Houston, Texas, United States)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark containing the letters ‘HP’ — EU trade mark No 52 449

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before EUIPO: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Procedure before EUIPO

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 1 February 2017 in Case R 1002/2016-5

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order the intervener to pay the costs of proceedings before the Court, as well as the EUIPO. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the intervener to pay the costs of proceedings before the Court, as well as the EUIPO.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 52(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 7 of Regulation No 207/2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 52(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 7 of Regulation No 207/2009;

| — | Infringement of Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
EXHIBIT
32.1.


Certification
of Principal Executive Officer


Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. 1350


(Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)








I, C.
Eugene Gronning, Chief Executive Officer, and Principal Accounting Officer, of
PMI Construction Group (the "Registrant") do hereby certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that, to the best of our knowledge, based upon a review of the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period September 30, 2008 of the
Registrant, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"):





(1)
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;
  and





(2)
            The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Registrant.





Date:
            
            November
      10, 2008
            
            By:
            /s/
      C. Eugene GronningC.
      Eugene Gronning, Chief Executive Officer andPrincipal
      Accounting Officer








* A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to PMI Construction Group and will be retained by PMI Construction
Group and furnished to the Securities Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 USC. 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
Golden Pond Healthcare, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Stephen F. Wiggins, Chairman and
President of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the SarbanesOxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                  |  |  |  |  |  |                        |  |                                                       
|----------------- |  |  |  |  |  | ---------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------
|                  |  |  | 
|December 17, 2007 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ Stephen F. Wiggins
|                  |  |  |  |  |  |                        |  | Stephen F. Wiggins, Chairman of the Board andPresident
H. R. 251 

One Hundred Sixteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE FIRST SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and nineteen 

An Act 

To extend by 15 months the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards Program 

of the Department of Homeland Security, and for other purposes. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism 

Standards Program Extension Act’’. 

SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF CHEMICAL FACILITY ANTI-TERRORISM STANDARDS PROGRAM OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY. 

Section 5 of the Protecting and Securing Chemical Facilities 

from Terrorist Attacks Act of 2014 (Public Law 113–254; 6 U.S.C. 

621 note) is amended by striking ‘‘4 years’’ and inserting ‘‘5 years 

and 3 months’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
CERTIFICATION
      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 of High Point Transport, Inc. (the
      "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2007, as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
      the undersigned principal executive officer and the principal financial officer
      of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)
            the
                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.





Date:  November
      19, 2007





/s/
      Paul A. Henley


Paul
      A.
      Henley


Principal
      Executive Officer





/s/
      Cristino L. Perez


Cristino
      L. Perez


Principal
      Financial and Accounting Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2336 Received in Senate (RDS)]

<DOC>
116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2336

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 29, 2019

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To amend title 11, United States Code, with respect to the definition 
                         of ``family farmer''.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Family Farmer Relief Act of 2019''.

SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF FAMILY FARMER.

    Section 101(18) of title 11, United States Code, is amended by 
striking ``$3,237,000'' each place that term appears and inserting 
``$10,000,000''.

SEC. 3. DETERMINATION OF BUDGETARY EFFECTS.

    The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of complying 
with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, shall be determined by 
reference to the latest statement titled ``Budgetary Effects of PAYGO 
Legislation'' for this Act, submitted for printing in the Congressional 
Record by the Chairman of the House Budget Committee, provided that 
such statement has been submitted prior to the vote on passage.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 25, 2019.

            Attest:

                                             CHERYL L. JOHNSON,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7020

GARY IVAN TERRY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DARLENE A. VELTRI, Warden; JEFF TILLEY, Discipline Hearing Officer; RODNEY TABRON, Unit Manager; TONY PARKS, Senior Correctional Officer; THERESA WOODS, Senior Correctional Officer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (CA-02-697-5-F) Submitted: January 30, 2004 Decided: February 24, 2004 Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion. Gary Ivan Terry, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Gary Ivan Terry appeals the district court’s order dismissing his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics , 403 U.S. 388 (1971), for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. The district court properly required exhaustion of administrative remedies under 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) (2000). Because Terry did not demonstrate to the district court that he had exhausted administrative remedies or that such remedies were not available, the court’s dismissal of the action was not an abuse of discretion. Terry may refile his action after exhaustion; therefore, we modify the dismissal to be without prejudice. See28 U.S.C. § 2106 (2000). Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm the district court’s order as modified. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED
AEGIS SEF | 2829 Technology Forest Boulevard, Suite 260 | The Woodlands, Texas 77381

Chapter 1081

Natural Gas Fixed Swap - HSC - Platts Inside FERC

DESCRIPTION

A monthly cash settled swap based upon the monthly price published by Platts Inside FERC for 

the location specified in Floating Price A.

FLOATING PRICE A

The Floating Price for each contract month will be equal to the Platts Inside FERC HSC published 

price for the corresponding contract month.

CONTRACT UNIT AND VALUE

The contract unit shall be MMBtus (million British thermal units). Each contract shall be valued 

as the contract quantity in MMBtus multiplied by the settlement price.

LISTING CYCLE

Up to 120 consecutive monthly contract periods

PRICES AND FLUCTUATIONS

Prices shall be quoted in U.S. dollars and cents per MMBtu. The minimum price fluctuation shall 

be $0.001 per MMBtu. The minimum price increment will be $0.0001. There shall be no

maximum price fluctuation.

TERMINATION OF TRADING

Posting of transactions shall cease on the last business day prior to the contract month.

FINAL SETTLEMENT

Delivery under the contract shall be by cash settlement. Final settlement, following termination 

of posting for a contract month, will be based on the Floating Price. The final settlement price 

will be the Floating Price calculated for each contract month.
# C_2021035EN.01000501.xml

| 1.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 35/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 35/5

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 25 November 2020 — European Commission v GEA Group AG

(Case C-823/18 P) (1)

(Appeal - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European markets for tin-based heat stabilisers and for heat stabilisers with epoxised soybean oil and esters as their base - Price fixing, market allocation and exchange of commercially sensitive information - Application of the ceiling of 10 % of turnover to one of the entities forming the undertaking - Annulment of the decision amending the fine imposed in the initial infringement decision - Fines - Concept of an ‘undertaking’ - Joint and several liability for payment of the fine - Principle of equal treatment - Date on which the fine is payable in the event of amendment)

(2021/C 35/05)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: European Commission (represented by: initially, T. Christoforou, P. Rossi and V. Bottka, and, subsequently, P. Rossi and V. Bottka, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings: GEA Group AG (represented by: C. Wagner and I. du Mont, Rechtsanwälte)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 18 October 2018, GEA Group v Commission (T-640/16, EU:T:2018:700); |
| --- | --- |

1.

Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 18 October 2018, GEA Group v Commission (T-640/16, EU:T:2018:700);

| 2. | Refers Case T-640/16 back to the General Court of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Refers Case T-640/16 back to the General Court of the European Union;

| 3. | Reserves the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Reserves the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 93, 11.3.2019.

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

MARIA GABRIEL,

Petitioner

v.

ARMANDO AGUSTIN AGUSTIN,

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 238 MAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 8th day of July, 2022

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2467 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2467

To prohibit the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce 
   from authorizing commercial finfish aquaculture operations in the 
  Exclusive Economic Zone except in accordance with a law authorizing 
                              such action.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 1, 2019

  Mr. Young introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To prohibit the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce 
   from authorizing commercial finfish aquaculture operations in the 
  Exclusive Economic Zone except in accordance with a law authorizing 
                              such action.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Keep Finfish Free Act of 2019''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON AUTHORIZING FINFISH AQUACULTURE IN THE EEZ.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, neither the Secretary 
of the Interior nor the Secretary of Commerce may issue any permit or 
in any other way authorize any person to conduct commercial finfish 
aquaculture operations in the Exclusive Economic Zone of the United 
States (as established by Proclamation Numbered 5030, dated March 10, 
1983), except in accordance with a law authorizing such action that is 
enacted after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### National Aeronautics and Space Administration

          - [Notice (01-063)] 

# AGENCY:

National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 

# ACTION:

Notice of prospective patent license. 

# SUMMARY:

NASA hereby gives notice that Thermosurgery Technology, Inc., of Phoenix, Arizona, has applied for an exclusive license to practice the invention described and claimed in U.S. Patent No. 6,083,158, entitled “Real-Time Visualization of Tissue Ischemia,” which is assigned to the United States of America as represented by the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Written objections to the prospective grant of a license should be sent to NASA Management Office-JPL. 

# DATE(S):

Responses to this notice must be received by July 30, 2001. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Patent Counsel, NASA Management Office-JPL, 4800 Oak Grove Drive, Mail Station 180-801, Pasadena, CA 91109-8099. 

Dated: May 22, 2001. 

Edward A. Frankle, 

General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 01-13619 Filed 5-30-01; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7510-01-U
Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed May 24, 2012.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-11-00564-CR

____________

LARRY DERNELL CHAMPION, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 10th District Court

Galveston County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 09CR3425

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

A jury convicted appellant of aggravated robbery. Appellant entered a plea of true 

to the enhancement paragraph and the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for 

twenty-five years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.

Appellant filed a notice of appeal.

Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is 

wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirement of Anders v. 

California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), presenting a professional evaluation of the 
2

record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. 

State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised of the 

right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford v. State, 813 

S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). At appellant’s request, the record was provided 

to him. Appellant filed a pro se response to counsel’s brief.

We have carefully reviewed the record, counsel’s brief, and appellant’s response, 

and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible 

error in the record. A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the 

state. We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief or a pro se 

response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for review. See Bledsoe 

v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). 

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Boyce, Christopher, and Jamison.

Do Not Publish — TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2555 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2555

To amend the Combat Duty Pay Act of 1952 to require that former members 
  of the uniformed services who were captured or entered a missing-in-
  action status during the Korean War while serving as a member of a 
   combat unit in Korea receive combat pay for each month spent in a 
captured or missing-in-action status, rather than just a total of four 
                                months.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 7, 2019

Mr. Sean Patrick Maloney of New York (for himself, Mr. Fitzpatrick, Mr. 
Crawford, and Mrs. Lee of Nevada) introduced the following bill; which 
            was referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Combat Duty Pay Act of 1952 to require that former members 
  of the uniformed services who were captured or entered a missing-in-
  action status during the Korean War while serving as a member of a 
   combat unit in Korea receive combat pay for each month spent in a 
captured or missing-in-action status, rather than just a total of four 
                                months.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Never Forgotten Korean War POW 
Act''.

SEC. 2. RECOGNITION OF ENTIRE PERIOD SPENT IN A CAPTURED OR MISSING-IN-
              ACTION STATUS DURING THE KOREAN WAR FOR RECEIPT OF COMBAT 
              PAY.

    (a) In General.--Section 704(b) of the Combat Duty Pay Act of 1952 
(title VII of Department of Defense Appropriation Act, 1953; 66 Stat. 
539) is amended by striking ``for not more than three months 
thereafter'' and inserting ``for each month thereafter''.
    (b) Application of Amendment.--
            (1) Covered persons.--Section 704(b) of the Combat Duty Pay 
        Act of 1952, as amended by subsection (a), applies only with 
        respect to a former member of the uniformed services who 
        received combat pay under such section and who is alive as of 
        the date of the enactment of this Act.
            (2) Combat pay amount.--In determining the actual amount to 
        be paid to a former member of the uniformed services covered by 
        paragraph (1), the Secretary of Defense shall increase the 
        amount determined under section 704(b) of the Combat Duty Pay 
        Act of 1952, as amended by subsection (a), using an appropriate 
        inflation adjustment.
                                 <all>
```