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

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3913 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3913

To authorize the Secretary of Education to provide grants for education 
 programs on the history of the treatment of Italian Americans during 
                             World War II.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 23, 2019

 Ms. Lofgren introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Education and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To authorize the Secretary of Education to provide grants for education 
 programs on the history of the treatment of Italian Americans during 
                             World War II.

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

SECTION 1. GRANTS FOR EDUCATION PROGRAMS ON THE HISTORY OF THE 
              TREATMENT OF ITALIAN AMERICANS DURING WORLD WAR II.

    (a) Authorization of Grants.--
            (1) In general.--The Secretary of Education may provide 
        grants for education programs on the history of the treatment 
        of Italian Americans during World War II.
            (2) Maximum grant amount.--A grant awarded under this 
        section may not exceed $50,000.
    (b) Use of Funds.--An eligible entity that receives a grant under 
this section shall use the grant funds to develop and implement public 
awareness education programs on the history of the treatment of Italian 
Americans during World War II.
    (c) Application.--To be selected to receive a grant under this 
section, an eligible entity shall submit an application to the 
Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing such information 
as the Secretary may require.
    (d) Priority.--In awarding grants under subsection (a), the 
Secretary shall give priority to Italian-American historical and 
cultural organizations.
    (e) Eligible Entity Defined.--In this section, the term ``eligible 
entity'' means--
            (1) Italian-American historical and cultural organizations; 
        and
            (2) such other entities as the Secretary determines 
        appropriate.
    (f) Authorization of Appropriations.--For grants under this 
section, there is authorized to be appropriated $3,000,000 for fiscal 
year 2020.
                                 <all>
```
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-15-00304-CV

Margaret Haule

v.

Channel Austin

On appeal from the

County Court at Law No. 2 of Travis County, Texas

Trial Cause No. C-1-CV-14-008537

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

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

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION in accordance with its opinion. Costs of 

the appeal are adjudged against appellant.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

May 12, 2016.
SCWC

- 2 0

- 0000 496

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI ‘ I

STATE OF HAWAI ʻ I , Respondent/Plaintiff

- Appellee,

vs.

KATHERINE RENEE MCQUEEN , Petitioner/Defendant

- Appellant.

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS ( CAAP

- 2 0

- 0000 496 ; CASE NO. 1CPC

- 19

- 0001394 )

ORDER REJECTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.)

Petitioner/Defendant

- Appellant’s Application for Writ

of Certiorari, filed on December 14 , 2022, is hereby rejected.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai ʻ i, January 25 , 202 3

.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

/s/ Todd W. Eddins Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCWC-20-0000496 25-JAN-2023 02:14 PM Dkt. 3 ODAC
Albert Dewayne BANKS, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-6704.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 28, 2018.

On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* and petition for writ of certiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and case remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit for further consideration in light of *Carpenter v. United States,* 585 U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 2206, --- L.E.2d ---- (2018).
Lloyd T. SCHUENKE, petitioner, v. Judy P. SMITH, Warden.

No. 17-5511.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
Xavier Lumar J'WEIAL, petitioner, v. Michael SEXTON, Acting Warden.

No. 17-6909.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 14, 2018.

Petition for rehearing denied.
In the Matter of DISBARMENT OF Thomas Allen CRAWFORD, Jr.

No. D-3017.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 25, 2018.

Disbarment order entered.
# L_2008165EN.01001001.xml

| 26.6.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 165/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.6.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 165/10

---

Information on the date of entry into force of the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Kiribati

On 15 November 2007 and 29 April 2008 respectively, the European Community and the Government of the Republic of Kiribati notified each other that the procedures necessary for entry into force of the Agreement had been completed (1).

1

The Agreement accordingly entered into force on 29 April 2008, in accordance with Article 18 thereof.

---

(1)  
  OJ L 205, 7.8.2007, p. 3.

1

---
Exhibit 32.1



Certification of Chief Executive Officer, Pursuant to

18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

As Adopted Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Borland Software Corporation (the Company) for the period ended September 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), Tod Nielsen, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, 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 his knowledge:



| | (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 of the Company at the end of the period covered by the Report and results
of operations of the Company for the period covered by the Report.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ TOD NIELSEN        
|Tod Nielsen            
|Chief Executive Officer



May 2, 2006



This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. This certification is not to be
incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Report), irrespective of any general
incorporation language contained in such filing.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AT MARCH 31, 1998 (UNAUDITED) AND THE STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE
QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1998 (UNAUDITED) AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED AS PART OF ITS
QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE PERIOD MARCH 31, 1998
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         651,131
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  285,561
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               936,692
<PP&E>                                      17,121,582
<DEPRECIATION>                               7,584,377
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,473,897
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  10,473,897
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,473,897
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               332,880
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  263,224
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    63,245
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Travonte Derrane HUGHES, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-7420.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 18, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
Lloyd TATE, petitioner, v. Jason BUNTING, Warden.

No. 17-5552.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
Robert B. PHILLIPS, petitioner, v. Donald J. TRUMP, President of the United States.

No. 17-8890.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 18, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
# C_2011370EN.01001301.xml

| 17.12.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 370/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.12.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 370/13

---

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 25 October 2011 — Solvay SA v European Commission

(Case C-110/10 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Competition - Market in soda ash in the Community - Concerted practice - Infringement of the rights of the defence - Access to the file - Hearing of the undertaking)

2011/C 370/19

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Solvay SA (represented by: P. Foriers, R. Jafferali, F. Louis and A. Vallery, avocats)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and F. Castillo de la Torre, acting as Agents, assisted by N. Coutrelis, avocate)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 17 December 2009 in Case T-58/01 Solvay v Commission, by which the General Court dismissed the appellants application for the annulment of Commission Decision 2003/5/EC of 13 December 2000 relating to a proceeding pursuant to Article 81 [EC] — Competition — Soda ash market in the Community — Agreement — Infringement of the right to be tried within reasonable time — Infringement of the rights of the defence

Solvay

Commission

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 17 December 2009 in Case T-58/01 Solvay v Commission; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 17 December 2009 in Case T-58/01 Solvay v Commission;

| 2. | Annuls Commission Decision 2003/5/EC of 13 December 2000 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the EC Treaty (COMP/33.133-B: Soda-ash — Solvay, CFK); |
| --- | --- |

2.

Annuls Commission Decision 2003/5/EC of 13 December 2000 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the EC Treaty (COMP/33.133-B: Soda-ash — Solvay, CFK);

| 3. | Orders the European Commission to pay the costs at first instance and on appeal. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the European Commission to pay the costs at first instance and on appeal.

---

(1)  OJ C 161, 19.6.2010.

1

---
# United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 20-50706 Summary Calendar

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee ,

versus

Carlos Eduardo Ruiz-Garcia,

Defendant—Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 4:20-CR-358-1

Before Higginbotham, Jones, and Costa, Circuit Judges

. Per Curiam: *
Carlos Eduardo Ruiz-Garcia appeals the district court’s order of pretrial detention. Because he has pleaded guilty and the district court has accepted his plea, his appeal is moot. See United States v. Ramirez , 145 F.3d 345, 356 (5th Cir. 1998); United States v. O’Saughnessy , 772 F.2d 112, 113 (5th

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED November 6, 2020
Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 20-50706 Document: 00515630140 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/06/2020No. 20-50706

2 Cir. 1985). We lack the power to decide moot questions, that is, “when, by virtue of an intervening event, a court of appeals cannot grant any effectual relief whatever in favor of the appellant.” Calderon v. Moore , 518 U.S. 149, 150 (1996) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
Accordingly, Ruiz-Garcia’s appeal is DISMISSED as moot. Case: 20-50706 Document: 00515630140 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/06/2020
<Page>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 31.01

                     RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATIONS

I, Robert M. Alderman, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of John W. Henry & Co./Millburn
L.P.;

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;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, 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 other certifying 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 end of 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 is reasonably 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 control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):

   a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
   operation of internal control 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 a significant role in the registrant's internal control
   over financial reporting.

Date: May 16, 2005
-----------------------
By /s/ ROBERT M. ALDERMAN
   ----------------------
Robert M. Alderman
Chief Executive Officer, President and Manager
(Principal Executive Officer)
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on
Form S-8 No. 333-83331 of MP3.com Inc. and in the related Prospectus of our
report dated January 21, 2000 (except Note 8, as to which the date is March 29,
2000), with respect to the financial statements and schedule of MP3.com, Inc.
included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1999.


                                                            ERNST & YOUNG LLP


San Diego, California
March 29, 2000
* The case is unanimously ordered submitted without oral argument pursuant to

Fed. R. App. P. 34(a) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### MAR 3 1998 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT
THELMA PATTERSON, Appellant, v. KENNETH L. SPEARS; LOLA FAYE DENTON, Appellees. No. 97-6261 (D.C. No. 96-CV-1325) (Western District of Oklahoma)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before ANDERSON , McKAY and LUCERO , Circuit Judges. Thelma Patterson was sued in bankruptcy court by Ke n Spears, the trustee of her daughter’s bankruptcy estate, and by WashitaState Bank, one of her daughter’s creditors. The bankruptcy court issued its final order, determining, inter alia , that Native Elm, a mobile home park that Ms. Patt erson claimed to own, was her daughter’s corporate alter ego and the refore part of the bankruptcy estate. Patterson then appealed to the District Co urt for the Western District of- 2 -

Oklahoma. The district court affirmed several elem ents of the order below, but reversed and remanded the bankruptcy court’s determ ination of Native Elm’s alter ego status. Patterson now appeals the district cou rt’s affirmance of the bankruptcy court. We must dismiss Patterson’s appeal for lack of juri sdiction. For appellate jurisdiction to lie, the district court must have e ntered a final order. See 28 U.S.C. § 158(d); In re Buckner , 66 F.3d 263, 265 (10th Cir. 1995). It has not done so. The district court determined that the bankruptcy c ourt applied an incorrect legal standard to determine whether Native Elm was the daughter’s alter ego, and reversed and remanded for “consideration of whether[Patterson’s daughter] used Native Elm as part of a design or scheme to perpetr ate a fraud.” Appellant’s App. at 74. “A district court order reversing the bankr uptcy court and remanding for significant further proceedings is not final and ap pealable under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d).” Buckner , 66 F.3d at 265. The proceedings on remand, invol ving complex determinations of fact, are more than “mere ‘ministerial’ computations involving little judicial discretion,” and therefor e constitute “significant further proceedings.” Id. (quoting Rubner & Kutner, P.C. v. United States Tr ustee (In re Lederman Enters., Inc.) , 997 F.2d 1321, 1323 (10th Cir. 1993)). Hence, no final, appealable order has yet been entered, and we are w ithout jurisdiction.- 3 -

DISMISSED. The mandate shall issue forthwith. ENTERED FOR THE COURT

Carlos F. Lucero Circuit Judge
Carolyn BAILEY, petitioner, v. ZUCKER, GOLDBERG & ACKERMAN, LLC, et al.

No. 17-33.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division denied.
Cornelius L. JONES, petitioner, v. ILLINOIS.

No. 17-5638.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 30, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Court of Illinois, Fourth District denied.
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 97-2912

___________ Richard King; Byrde King, * * Appellants, * * Nyetta Dienagha, a minor, by his * parents and guardian ad litems, * Richard and Byrde King; Derrick * Appeal from the United States King, a minor, by his parents and * District Court for the guardian ad litems, Richard and * Western District of Missouri. Byrde King; Richard King, Jr., a * minor, by his parents and guardian * [UNPUBLISHED] litems, Richard and Byrde King, * * Plaintiffs, * * v. * * City of Columbia Police Department; * Wendy Stokes; Bryan Piester; City * of Columbia; Chief Ernest Barbee; * Robert Bennett; Michael Shaw; Ken * Hammond; Shelley Jones; Lloyd * Simons, * * Appellees. *

___________ Submitted: February 6, 1998 Filed: February 10, 1998

___________TheHonorable Scott O. Wright, United States District Judge for the Western 1 Distri ctof Missouri, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorabl e William A. Knox, United States Magistrate Judge for th e Western District of Missouri. -2- Before BOWMAN, WOLLMAN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circui t Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.

Richard and Byrde King and their children appeal from the District Court & s 1 adverse grant of summary judgment in their civil rights action against the City o f Columbia, Missouri, and several city police officers. After carefully reviewing th e record and the part

ies & briefs, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. The Kings & motion for appointment of counsel is denied. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.