alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
H. Res. 1038 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

January 27, 2010. 

Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it 

shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 

3726) to establish the Castle Nugent National Historic Site 

at St. Croix, United States Virgin Islands, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are 

waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. 

The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended 

by the Committee on Natural Resources now printed in the 

bill shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, 

shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, 

to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one 

hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair 

and ranking minority member of the Committee on Natural 

Resources; and (2) one motion to recommit with or without 

instructions. 
2 

•HRES 1038 EH 

SEC. 2. Upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be 

in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 4474) to authorize the continued use of certain water diversions located 

on National Forest System land in the Frank Church-River 

of No Return Wilderness and the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness in the State of Idaho, and for other purposes. All points 

of order against consideration of the bill are waived except 

those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. The bill shall 

be considered as read. All points of order against provisions 

in the bill are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided 

and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of 

the Committee on Natural Resources; and (2) one motion to 

recommit. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
H. Res. 1014 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

February 2, 2010. 

Whereas one in every five Americans struggles with some sort 

of disability, be it intellectual, physical or otherwise, and 

the need for inclusion of individuals with disabilities is a 

family, community, and national priority; 

Whereas a similar ratio exists in the Jewish community, with 

over one million Jewish individuals living with a form of 

disability; 

Whereas individuals with disabilities face significant disadvantages in educational and employment opportunities; 

Whereas 70 percent of individuals with disabilities are unemployed or significantly underemployed; 

Whereas special education and related programming do not 

address underlying needs for appropriate training to lead 

to greater independence and employment; 

Whereas Yachad, the National Jewish Council for Disabilities, and its parent organization, the Union of Orthodox 

Jewish Congregations of America, is dedicated to addressing the needs of all individuals with disabilities and 

including them in the Jewish community; 

Whereas Yachad provides programming for individuals with 

disabilities and their families to foster inclusion in com-
2 

•HRES 1014 EH 

munal happenings and assists in placing individuals with 

disabilities in employment; and 

Whereas Yachad and the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America are cosponsoring North American 

Inclusion Month in February to increase public awareness of the life circumstances of individuals with disabilities, and the need for increased employment opportunities, better special education and increased inclusion of 

these individuals on the family, communal, and national 

levels: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives recognizes 

and supports the goals and ideals of North American Inclusion Month. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
Exhibit 31.2

Certification pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I,
William F. Weissman, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Rubicon Technology, Inc.; and
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any 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;
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      |  |     |  |                        
|--------------------- |  | --- |  | -----------------------
|Date: August 23, 2012 |  | By: |  | /s/ William F. Weissman
|                      |  |     |  | William F. Weissman    
|                      |  |     |  | Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit 31.2****CERTIFICATION**I, **Gregory A. Wing**, certify that;1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Stillwater Mining Company (the “Company”); 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omitto state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in thisreport, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations andcash flows of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The Company’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) andinternal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and15(d)-15(f)) for the Company and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the Company, is madeknown to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;  b) Designed such internal control over financialreporting, or caused such internal controlover financial reporting to be designed underour supervision, to provide reasonableassurance regarding the reliability offinancial reporting and the preparation offinancial statements for external purposes inaccordance with generally accepted accountingprinciples;  c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’sdisclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions aboutthe effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the periodcovered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  d) Disclosed in this report any change in theCompany’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the Company’smost recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the Company’s internalcontrol over financial reporting; and5. The Company’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the Company’s auditors and the audit committee of theCompany’s Board of Directors: a) All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal controls over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the Company’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the Company’sinternal controls over financial reporting.        Dated:  February 26, 2008 /s/ Gregory A. Wing   Gregory A. Wing   Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18U.S.C.
SECTION 1350



In connection with the Quarterly Report of 11 Good Energy, Inc.
(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the six month period ending June 30, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Frederick C. Berndt, Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 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 result of operations of the Company.



|August 23, 2012 | /s/ GARY R. SMITH                  
|--------------- | -----------------------------------
|                |                                    
|                | GARY R. SMITH                      
|                | INTERIM PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
**Exhibit 12.1****CERTIFICATION**I, Thierry Pilenko, certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Technip; 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 company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The company’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e))and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and15d-15(f)) for the company and 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 company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  (b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internalcontrol over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to providereasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparationof financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally acceptedaccounting principles;  (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the company’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and 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 company’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the company’s internal controlover financial reporting.5. The company’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the company’s auditors and theaudit committee of the company’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 company’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 company’s internal control over financial reporting.         By:       /s/ Thierry Pilenko   Thierry Pilenko   Chairman and Chief Executive Officer   Date:June 20, 2007
#### Donald M. Matusik, Doing Business as J.B. White Realty Associates, Respondent, v Peter R. Ward et al., Appellants.

Submitted April 19, 2010;

decided June 10, 2010

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution.
Exhibit 32.1


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350 AS ADOPTED


PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





The undersigned 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 their knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended August 31, 2010 of Lucky Boy Silver Corp. (the “Company”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the information contained in such periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in such report.





Very truly yours,








/s/Kenneth B. LiebscherKenneth B. LiebscherChief Executive OfficerOctober 21, 2010/s/ Fortunato VillamagnaFortunato VillamagnaChief Financial OfficerDated: October 21, 2010








A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been 
provided to Lucky Boy Silver Corp. and will be furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff 
upon request.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-22-00572-CV

Valerie Nicole Hafoka

v.

Iwika Hafoka

On Appeal from the

105th District Court of Nueces County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2022-FAM-3129-D

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion. No costs are assessed, as appellant filed an 

affidavit of inability to pay costs. 

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

June 29, 2023
# C_2012043EN.01009801.xml

| 15.2.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 43/98 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.2.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 43/98

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the accelerated phasing-in of double-hull or equivalent design requirements for single-hull oil tankers (recast)’

COM(2011) 566 final — 2011/0243 (COD)

2012/C 43/22

On 29 September 2011 the European Parliament and on 18 October 2011 the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 100(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), on the

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the accelerated phasing-in of double-hull or equivalent design requirements for single-hull oil tankers (Recast)

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the accelerated phasing-in of double-hull or equivalent design requirements for single-hull oil tankers (Recast)

COM(2011) 566 final — 2011/0243 (COD).

Since the Committee endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 476th plenary session of 7 and 8 December 2011 (meeting of 7 December), by 177 votes with 11 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 7 December 2011.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Staffan NILSSON

---
----

EXHIBIT 32.1

|   | 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 consolidated financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of, and for, the period covered by the Report. |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/    | Kevin T. Bottomley                    |   |
|--------|---------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Kevin T. Bottomley                    |   |
|   | President and Chief Executive Officer |   |
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FORTHE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

# FILED NOV - 820ta Clerk, U.S. DiStrict & Bankruptcy Courts forthe Districtof Columbia Stephen P. Wallace, Plaintiff,
v. Tom Coburn 

### etaI., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No.

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

# IV 1920

This matter is before the Court on its initial review ofplaintiffs pro se complaint and application for leave to proceed informapauperis. Pursuantto 28 U.S.C. 

### § 1915(e), the Court is required to dismiss a complaint upon a determination that it, among other grounds, is frivolous. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). Plaintiff, a Tulsa, Oklahoma, resident and self-described "Private Attorney General," has submitted a "Complaint for Convening a Special Grand Jury & Forensic Audit UnderFreedom ofInformation Act." Title 18 ofthe United States Code requires a "grandjuryimpaneled [pursuant to 18 U.S.c. 

### § 3331] within anyjudicial district to inquire into offenses against the criminal laws ofthe United States alleged to have been committed within that district." 18 U.S.c. § 3332(a). "Such alleged offenses may be brought to the attention ofthe grandjuryby the court orby any attorney appearing onbehalfofthe United States for the presentation of evidence." Jd.


# 3Plaintiffaccuses Senators Tom Coburn and James Inhofe, Congressman Henry C. Johnson, United States District Judge Gregory Frizzell ofthe Northern District ofOklahoma, and Robert L. Walker, former StaffCounsel and ChiefCounsel ofthe Senate and House ethics committees, ofcommitting "ultra vires civil/criminal acts" in Washington, D.C. Compl. at 2; see
case caption (listing defendants' addresses) & attachments. He also invokes the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.c. §§ 1961 et seq. As a remedy, plaintiff seeks an order "enjoining any Party from arresting, harassing, intimidating or attempting to murder PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL during the pendency ofthe current on-going Grand Jury Investigation ofEnsign,Coburn, et al.,
...." Id. at 3 (capitalization in original). A complaint may be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) as frivolous when "there is indisputably absent any factual and legal basis for the asserted wrong," Brandon v. District of Columbia Bd. of Parole, 734 F.2d 56, 59 (D.C. Cir. 1984), or when it describes fantastic or delusional scenarios or contains "fanciful factual allegation[s]." Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319,325 (1989); accord Best v. Kelly, 39 F.3d 328, 330-31 (D.C. Cir. 1994). This complaint qualifies for such treatment. A separate Order ofdismissal accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.



# - / Date: November**~,** 2010

2
# C_2010333EN.01001101.xml

| 10.12.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 333/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.12.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 333/11

---

Communication in accordance with Article 12(5)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 on the information provided by the customs authorities of the Member States concerning the classification of goods in the customs nomenclature

2010/C 333/08

Binding Tariff Information ceases to be valid from this day if it becomes incompatible with the interpretation of the customs nomenclature as a result of the following international tariff measures:

Amendments to the Harmonised System Explanatory Notes and the Compendium of Classification Opinions, approved by the Customs Cooperation Council (CCC doc. NC1553) — report of the 45th Session of the HS Committee:

AMENDMENTS TO THE EXPLANATORY NOTES TO BE DONE UNDER ARTICLE 8 PROCEDURE OF THE HS CONVENTION AND CLASSIFICATION OPINIONS EDITED BY THE HS COMMITTEE OF THE WORLD CUSTOMS ORGANISATION

AMENDMENTS TO THE EXPLANATORY NOTES TO BE DONE UNDER ARTICLE 8 PROCEDURE OF THE HS CONVENTION AND CLASSIFICATION OPINIONS EDITED BY THE HS COMMITTEE OF THE WORLD CUSTOMS ORGANISATION

(45th SESSION OF THE HSC IN MARCH 2010)

DOC. NC1553

Amendments of the Explanatory Notes of the Nomenclature annexed to the HS Convention

Amendments of the Explanatory Notes of the Nomenclature annexed to the HS Convention

| General interpretative rules GIR-1 | O/24 |
| --- | --- |
| Ch. 29 General | Ο/6 |
| 29.28 | Ο/10 |
| Ch. 30 General | Ο/6 |
| 32.14 | Ο/8 |
| 38.24 | O/23 |
| Ch. 39 General | O/8 |
| 39.07 | O/6 |
| 48.14 | O/12 |
| 85.18 | O/39 |

General interpretative rules GIR-1

O/24

Ch. 29 General

Ο/6

29.28

Ο/10

Ch. 30 General

Ο/6

32.14

Ο/8

38.24

O/23

Ch. 39 General

O/8

39.07

O/6

48.14

O/12

85.18

O/39

Classification Opinions approved by the HS Committee

Classification Opinions approved by the HS Committee

| 3307.90/3 | Ο/14 |
| --- | --- |
| 8517.62/14 | O/15 |
| 8517.62/15-16 | O/16 |
| 8517.62/17-19 | O/17 |
| 8518.10/1 | O/18 |
| 8704.23/1 | O/19 |
| 9503.00/8 (Amendment to the legal basis) | O/11 |
| 9506.99/1 | O/21 |

3307.90/3

Ο/14

8517.62/14

O/15

8517.62/15-16

O/16

8517.62/17-19

O/17

8518.10/1

O/18

8704.23/1

O/19

9503.00/8 (Amendment to the legal basis)

O/11

9506.99/1

O/21

Information regarding the contents of these measures can be obtained from the Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union of the European Commission (rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 200, 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel, BELGIQUE/BELGIË) or can be downloaded from the Internet site of this Directorate-General:

http://ec.europa.eu/comm/taxation_customs/customs/customs_duties/tariff_aspects/harmonised_system/index_en.htm

---
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 50137 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.

MICHAEL DEAN RAMOS

, also known as Michael Ramos,

Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal s from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 7:13

- CR

- 161

- 1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Michael Dean Ramos has moved for

leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California

, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011).

Ramos h a s not filed a r esponse. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the
relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s
assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review.

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED
October 18 , 2016

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 16-50137 Document: 00513722501 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/18/2016No. 16

- 50137

2 Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to with draw is GRANTED, counsel is
excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED.

See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Case: 16-50137 Document: 00513722501 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/18/2016