alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Jason Lydell ORR, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES. *

No. 17-7717.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 21, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Kenneth RIVERA, petitioner, v. Sergeant LEONARD, et al.

No. 16-9359.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
Norman T. POWELL, petitioner, v. Rick WALKER, et al.

No. 17-5011.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
# C_2009082EN.01001401.xml

| 4.4.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 82/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.4.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 82/14

---

Appeal brought on 21 January 2009 by the French Republic against the judgment delivered on 4 December 2008 by the Court of First Instance (Seventh Chamber) in Case T-284/08 People's Mojahedin Organisation of Iran v Council of the European Union

(Case C-27/09 P)

(2009/C 82/26)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: French Republic (represented by: E. Belliard, G. de Bergues, A.-L. During, acting as Agents)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings: People's Mojahedin Organisation of Iran, Council of the European Union, Commission of the European Communities

Other parties to the proceedings:

Form of order sought

| — | set aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities of 4 December 2008 in Case T-284/08 People's Mojahedin Organisation of Iran v Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

set aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities of 4 December 2008 in Case T-284/08 People's Mojahedin Organisation of Iran v Council;

| — | itself give final judgment in the case by dismissing the PMOI's action or refer the case back to the Court of First Instance. |
| --- | --- |

—

itself give final judgment in the case by dismissing the PMOI's action or refer the case back to the Court of First Instance.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The French Government considers that the judgment under appeal should be set aside, first, because the Court of First Instance erred in law by holding that the Council had adopted Decision 2008/583/EC (1) in disregard of the PMOI's rights of defence, without taking account of the specific circumstances of the adoption of that decision; second, because the Court erred in law by considering that the judicial procedure opened in France against alleged members of the PMOI did not constitute a decision meeting the definition in Article 1(4) of Common Position 2001/931/CFSP of 27 December 2001 on the application of specific measures to combat terrorism; and, finally, because the Court erred in law by holding that the refusal by the Council to communicate point 3 a) of one of the three documents supplied by the French authorities to the Council in support of their request for the inclusion of the PMOI in the list established by Decision 2008/583/EC, and sent to the Court by the Council in response to the Court Order of 26 September 2008 on measures of inquiry, did not enable the Court to review the lawfulness of Decision 2008/583/EC and infringed the right to effective judicial protection.

1

---

(1)  Council Decision of 15 July 2008 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism and repealing Decision 2007/868/EC (OJ 2008 L 188, p. 21).

1

---
EX 32.1



PRESIDENTS CERTIFICATION



CERTIFICATE 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 Annual Report on the Form 10-KSB/A of The Bralorne Mining Company (the Company) for the year ended November 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Rene Bernard, Chief Executive Officer, President and Director, 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 my knowledge and belief:



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



2.     The information contained in this Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.







/s/ Rene Bernard



Rene Bernard



Chief Executive Officer

President and Director



Date:  June 9, 2004
Michael Alexander WARD, petitioner, v. TEXAS.

No. 17-8217.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 29, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Texas, Sixth District denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule  contains summary financial  information  extracted from Form 10-Q
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  6-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Dec-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 Jan-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   Jun-30-1998
<CASH>                                         10,103
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  60,293
<ALLOWANCES>                                   2,930
<INVENTORY>                                    34,580
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               110,062
<PP&E>                                         68,960
<DEPRECIATION>                                 45,992
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 153,072
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          73,722
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          9,875
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       2,052
<OTHER-SE>                                     22,899
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   153,072
<SALES>                                        151,510
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               151,510
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  72,380
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               71,137
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               398
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             2,191
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                5,580
<INCOME-TAX>                                   2,567
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            3,006
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   3,006
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  1.29
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  1.02
        

</TABLE>
Jean COULTER, petitioner, v. Alexander H. LINDSAY, Jr., et al.

No. 17-1336.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 29, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh Office denied.
Luvell DORTCH, petitioner, v. ILLINOIS.

No. 17-7201.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 26, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District denied.
IIB 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4031 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 10, 2020 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 

Public Works 

AN ACT 

To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to reauthorize the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, 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, 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 4031 RFS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Great Lakes Restora3 tion Initiative Act of 2019’’ or the ‘‘GLRI Act of 2019’’. 

4 SEC. 2. GREAT LAKES RESTORATION INITIATIVE REAU5 THORIZATION. 

6 Section 118(c)(7)(J)(i) of the Federal Water Pollu7 tion Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1268(c)(7)(J)(i)) is amend8 ed— 

9 (1) by striking ‘‘is authorized’’ and inserting 

10 ‘‘are authorized’’; 

11 (2) by striking the period at the end and insert12 ing a semicolon; 

13 (3) by striking ‘‘this paragraph $300,000,000’’ 

14 and inserting the following: ‘‘this paragraph— 

15 ‘‘(I) $300,000,000’’; and 

16 (4) by adding at the end the following: 

17 ‘‘(II) $375,000,000 for fiscal 

18 year 2022; 

19 ‘‘(III) $400,000,000 for fiscal 

20 year 2023; 

21 ‘‘(IV) $425,000,000 for fiscal 

22 year 2024; 

23 ‘‘(V) $450,000,000 for fiscal year 

24 2025; and 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 4031 RFS

1 ‘‘(VI) $475,000,000 for fiscal 

2 year 2026.’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives February 5, 

2020. 

Attest: CHERYL L. JOHNSON, 

Clerk. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
In Re Joseph S. AUGUSTE, petitioner.

No. 17-5242.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of habeas corpus denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted from the
consolidated  balance  sheet and the  consolidated  statement of income filed as
part of the  quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such quarterly report on form 10-Q/A.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                        0000853102
<NAME>                                       Day Runner, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Jun-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 Jul-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   Sep-30-1998
<CASH>                                          1,449
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  42,471
<ALLOWANCES>                                    8,098
<INVENTORY>                                    39,485
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               86,417
<PP&E>                                         30,573
<DEPRECIATION>                                 16,716
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                109,894
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          32,684
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                           14
<OTHER-SE>                                     77,190
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  109,894
<SALES>                                        47,731
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               47,731
<CGS>                                          24,860
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  24,860
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               16,922
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 33
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 5,916
<INCOME-TAX>                                    2,247
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             3,669
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                    3,669
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0.31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.29



</TABLE>
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3814 

To amend the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 17, 2019 

Mr. RICHMOND (for himself and Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006, 

and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Domestic Offshore En5 ergy Reinvestment Act of 2019’’. 

6 SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE GULF OF MEXICO ENERGY 

7 SECURITY ACT OF 2006. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 105(a) of the Gulf of 

9 Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006 (43 U.S.C. 1331 

10 note) is amended— 


khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3814 IH

1 (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘50’’ and in2 serting ‘‘37.5’’; and 

3 (2) in paragraph (2)— 

4 (A) in the matter preceding subparagraph 

5 (A), by striking ‘‘50’’ and inserting ‘‘62.5’’; 

6 (B) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘75’’ 

7 and inserting ‘‘80’’; and 

8 (C) in subparagraph (B), by striking ‘‘25’’ 

9 and inserting ‘‘20’’. 

10 (b) IN GENERAL.—Section 105(d) of the Gulf of 

11 Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006 (43 U.S.C. 1331 

12 note) is amended— 

13 (1) in paragraph (1), by inserting after sub14 paragraph (E): 

15 ‘‘(F) planning, engineering, design, con16 struction, operations, and maintenance of one 

17 or more projects that are specifically authorized 

18 by any other Act for ecosystem restoration, hur19 ricane protection, or flood damage prevention.’’; 

20 and 

21 (2) in paragraph (2), by striking paragraph (2) 

22 and inserting: 

23 ‘‘(2) LIMITATION.—Of the amounts received by 

24 a Gulf producing State or coastal political subdivi25 sion under subsection (b)— 


khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3814 IH

1 ‘‘(A) not more than 3 percent may be used 

2 for the purposes described in paragraph (1)(E); 

3 and 

4 ‘‘(B) not less than 25 percent may be used 

5 for the purposes described in paragraph (1)(F), 

6 and shall be applied proportionally to the appli7 cable Federal and non-Federal share pursuant 

8 to such specific project authorization.’’. 

9 (c) IN GENERAL.—Section 105(f) of the Gulf of Mex10 ico Energy Security Act of 2006 (43 U.S.C. 1331 note) 

11 is amended by striking section 105(f). 

Æ 


khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with BILLS
Jose LATORRE, petitioner, v. Brent ADRIAN, et al.

No. 17-8261.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 4, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Florida denied.
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed March 

5, 2013.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-12-00791-CV

JACQUELINE WILLIAMS, EXECUTRIX FOR THE ESTATE OF JAVIER 

RAMIREZ CRUZ AND YOLANDA ROSENDA RAMIREZ CRUZ, 

Appellants

V.

PROVIDENT AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee

On Appeal from the 270th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2010-78994

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

This is an appeal from a judgment signed August 1, 2012. On February 22, 

2013, appellants filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1. 

The motion is granted.

Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Frost, Brown, and Busby.
Brian Michael BREWER, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-8213.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 23, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
#### MURPHY v. GULF OIL CORPORATION.

No. 8732.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Argued Feb. 9, 1945.

Decided Feb. 14, 1945.

Abraham E. Freedman, of Philadelphia, Pa. (Freedman & Goldstein, of Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellant.

Rowland C. Evans, Jr., of Philadelphia, Pa. (Krusen, Evans & Shaw, of Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellee.

Before PARKER and GOODRICH, Circuit Judges, and LEAHY, District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by a member of the crew of a vessel in an action seeking recovery from the owner on the ground that the latter was constituted an insurer against war risks by the provisions of an order promulgated by the Maritime War Emergency Board. The court below held that no such liability on the part of the owner existed in view of the fact that it had procured from the War Shipping Administration a war risk insurance policy insuring those who were required by the order to be insured. Whether the procurement of such a policy is a compliance with the order is a question which is no longer of any practical importance, since it has been answered in the affirmative by a subsequent order or decision of the Board. We think, however, that it was correctly answered by the judge below for reasons adequately set forth in his opinion.

Affirmed.
Exhibit 32.1





INSWEB CORPORATION


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 Annual Report of InsWeb Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Hussein A. Enan, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of InsWeb, 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) 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 InsWeb.





/s/ HUSSEIN A. ENANHussein A. EnanChairman of the Board and Chief Executive

Officer

Dated: March 31, 2011








In connection with the Annual Report of InsWeb Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Kiran Rasaretnam, Chief Financial Officer of InsWeb, 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) 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 InsWeb.





/s/ KIRAN RASARETNAMKiran RasaretnamChief Financial Officer

Dated: March 31, 2011
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1999
<CASH>                                             157
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   27,124
<ALLOWANCES>                                       525
<INVENTORY>                                     37,051
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                66,215
<PP&E>                                          94,523
<DEPRECIATION>                                  49,385
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 116,423
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           11,658
<BONDS>                                          7,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           10,129<F1>
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,418
<OTHER-SE>                                      82,816
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   116,423
<SALES>                                        227,785
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               227,785
<CGS>                                          168,603
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  204,251
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (289)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    25
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 647
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 23,176
<INCOME-TAX>                                     8,881
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             14,295
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    14,295
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.87
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.87
<FN>
<F1>Represents Common Stock held by ESOP
</FN>


</TABLE>
|
|

|                                          |                                          |  | EXHIBIT
      21.1                                     | 
|----------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------ | 
|                                          |                                          |  |                                                        | 
|PACIFIC
      MAGTRON INTERNATIONAL CORP.
|                                          |                                          |  |                                                        | 
|                                          | SUBSIDIARIES                             |  |                                                        | 
|                                          |                                          |  |                                                        | 
|                                          | Pacific Magtron, Inc.                    |  |    wholly
      owned California corporation          | 
|                                          |                                          |  |                                                        | 
|                                          | Pacific Magtron (GA),
      Inc.         |  |    wholly
      owned Georgia corporation             | 
|                                          |                                          |  |                                                        | 
|                                          | LiveWarehouse, Inc.                      |  |    wholly
      owned California corporation          | 
|                                          |                                          |  |                                                        | 
|                                          | Frontline Network Consulting,
      Inc. |  |    majority
      owned (95%) California  Corporation | 
|                                          |                                          |  |                                                        | 
|                                          | Lea Publishing, Inc.                     |  |    wholly
      owned California corporation          | 

|
|
|
|