alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```
  
 
WHEAT - KANSAS CITY BOARD OF TRADE                                   Code-001612
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 01/27/09          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:       85,372
COMMITMENTS
  22,193    8,495   11,090   34,835   42,974   68,118   62,559   17,254   22,813

CHANGES FROM 01/20/09 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     -1,252)
   1,723      176   -1,491   -2,057     -879   -1,825   -2,194      573      942

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    26.0     10.0     13.0     40.8     50.3     79.8     73.3     20.2     26.7

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      126)
      33       20       29       54       53      105       89
```

----

Updated January 30, 2009
EASON LAND CO., LLC, et al., petitioners, v. Ryan ZINKE, Secretary of the Interior, et al.

No. 17-533.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 16, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-1-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                      33,035,891
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               10,573,838
<ALLOWANCES>                                   825,024
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            55,782,008
<PP&E>                                      19,055,384
<DEPRECIATION>                              13,942,866
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              75,296,536
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       25,476,965
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       129,557
<OTHER-SE>                                  38,788,792
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                75,296,536
<SALES>                                      4,439,903
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            12,464,644
<CGS>                                          806,130
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,079,392
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            10,576,550
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               372,998
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,907
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                357,526
<INCOME-TAX>                                   135,860
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            221,666
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   221,666
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.02
<FN>
</FN>


</TABLE>
Steven Dennis FREDERICK, petitioner, v. PENNSYLVANIA.

No. 17-6978.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, Harrisburg Office denied.
Maggae Jo JACKSON, petitioner, v. Sara E. LIOI, Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio.

No. 17-5212.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 11, 2017.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Exhibit 32.2



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 Pamrapo Bancorp, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Kenneth D. Walter, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, 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 result of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ KENNETH D. WALTERKenneth D. WalterChief Financial Officer




August 9, 2005
Allan Latoi STORY, petitioner, v. Ralph T. STROTHER, Judge, District Court of Texas, McLennan County, et al.

No. 17-5781.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 30, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Betsy P. VARNO, petitioner, v. Donald CANFIELD, et al.

No. 16-9094.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
Kevin SMITH, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-6794.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 8, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 8- 29 63

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca
ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e

v.
And rew Wolt ers
ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

__

__ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Weste rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i - Sp rin gf ie ld

__

__ __ __ __ __ Su bm it te d: Octo be r 04 , 20 19 Fi le d: Octo be r 11 , 20 19 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re GRUENDER, BENTON, and STRAS, Ci rcu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ PER CURI AM.And rew W ol te rs ap pe al s th e di st ric t co ur t’s or de r co m m it ti ng hi m to th e 1

cu st o d y o f t h e Att or ne y Gen eral fo r ho sp it al iz at io n an d care or tre at m en t un de r 18 U.S.C. § 4 24 5. Hav in g ju ris di ct io n u nd er 2 8 U.S.C. § 12 91 , th is co ur t af fir m s.
Upo n care fu l rev ie w of th e reco rd , in cl ud in g th e ps y ch ol og ic al ev al ua ti on s of

a m en ta l heal th pr of

es si on al whe re W ol te rs is pre se nt ly con fin ed fo r tre at m en t, and of de fen se co un se l’s ind ep en de nt ps y ch ol og ic al ex am in er, th is co ur t co nc lu de s th at th e di st ric t co ur t d id no t ab us e it s di sc ret io n in de nyin g W ol te rs a co nt in ua nc e to ob ta in a se co nd in de pe nd en t ps y ch ol og ic al ev al ua ti on

. Se e Vas qu ez v. Co lo re s , 64 8 F.3 d 64 8, 65 2 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ) (s ta nd ard of rev ie w). The co ur t ’s se ct io n 42 45 fin di ng
was su pp or te d by a pr ep on de ran ce of th e ev id en ce, an d was no t cl earl y erro ne ou s. Se e 18 U.S.C. § 42 45 (d ) (b ur de n of pr oo f); Uni te d St at es v. Bea n, 37 3 F.3 d 87 7, 87 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 04 ) (s ta nd ard of rev ie w). W ol te rs ’s pr o se arg um en ts of fer no ba si s fo r rel ie f. Thi s co ur t no te s th at W ol te rs ’s cu st od ia ns m us t pr ep are an nu al rep or ts co nc ern in g hi s

m en ta l co nd it io n an d th e ne ed fo r c o n t in ue d co m m it m en t. Se e 18 U.S.C. § 42 47 (e)( 1) (B).

The jud gm en t is a f

f i rm ed , an d co un se l’s m ot io n to wit hd raw is gr an te d. W ol te rs ’s pr o s e m ot io n to un se al th e br ie f, ad de nd um , an d ap pe nd ix fil ed in th is

m at te r is gra nt ed

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

The Hon or ab le M. Dou gl as Harp oo l , U n i t ed St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e 1 W es te rn Dis tri ct of Mi ss ou ri, ad op ti ng th e rep or t an d reco m m en d a t i on of th e Hon or ab le Dav id P. Ru sh , Uni te d St at es Mag is tra te Ju dg e fo r th e W es te rn Dis tri ct of Mi ss ou ri.
-2

-
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4630 

To amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to clarify 

when certain academic assessments shall be administered. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 8, 2019 

Mr. ZELDIN (for himself and Mr. YOUNG) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor 

A BILL 

To amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 

of 1965 to clarify when certain academic assessments 

shall be administered. 

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 ‘‘Student Testing Im5 provement and Accountability Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 Congress finds the following: 

8 (1) Prior to 2001, Federal law required States 

9 only to test students once per grade span. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 4630 IH

1 (2) Following the enactment of the No Child 

2 Left Behind Act of 2001, which amended the Ele3 mentary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, 

4 Federal education policy has placed an increased 

5 emphasis on testing assessments, requiring students 

6 to undergo standardized testing every year in grades 

7 3 through 8. 

8 (3) Reducing the frequency of federally required 

9 testing will allow more time for student learning and 

10 empower States and school districts to have more 

11 local control over the frequency of testing. 

12 (4) Students will have more time to receive one13 on-one instruction and develop critical thinking and 

14 problem-solving skills through a well-rounded edu15 cation and curriculum. 

16 (5) Moving away from the Federal practice of 

17 annually ‘‘teaching to the test’’ will empower edu18 cators to provide instruction in a way that best in19 spires and prepares our country’s next generation of 

20 leaders. 

21 (6) With grade span testing, our educators will 

22 be more able to focus on those students who are 

23 most in need but who also lose the most class time 

24 preparing for annual tests. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•HR 4630 IH

1 (7) Grade span testing will allow States the 

2 flexibility to develop more meaningful, tailored as3 sessment systems that provide valid, reliable data. 

4 (8) The yearly testing currently required by 

5 Federal law should be replaced with grade span test6 ing. 

7 SEC. 3. ACADEMIC ASSESSMENTS. 

8 (a) AMENDMENT.—Section 1111(b)(2)(B)(v)(I) of 

9 the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 

10 U.S.C. 6311(b)(2)(B)(v)) is amended to read as follows: 

11 ‘‘(v)(I) in the case of mathematics 

12 and reading or language arts, be adminis13 tered not less than once during— 

14 ‘‘(aa) grades 3 through 5; 

15 ‘‘(bb) grades 6 through 9; and 

16 ‘‘(cc) grades 10 through 12;’’. 

17 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

18 subsection (a) shall take effect on the first August 2 after 

19 the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
Warren DAILEY, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-821.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 8, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
MASTEC ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES, A DIVISION OF MASTEC, INC., petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD.

No. 16-1370.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied.
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 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 XATA Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for
the period ending December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of the Company hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 that based on his knowledge: 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 as of and for the periods covered in the Report. /s/ Craig S. FawcettCraig S. Fawcett, Chief Executive Officer
 Dated: February 11, 2005 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form
within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided
to XATA Corporation and will be retained by XATA Corporation and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Motion Granted and Order filed June 11, 2021.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 21

- 00320

- CV

IN RE MICHAELS STORES, INC. D/BA MICHAELS ART & CRAFTS #2719 , Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

WRIT OF MANDAMUS 157th District Court Harris County, Texas T rial Court Cause No. 2019

- 23106


### O RDER
On June 11, 2021 , relator In re Michaels Stores, Inc. d/b / a Michaels Art & Crafts #2719 filed a petition for writ of m andamus and an emergency motion for temporary relief in this Court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22. 2 21; see also Tex. R. App. P. 5 2. In the petition, relator asks this Court to compel the Honorable2 Tanya Garrison, presiding judge of the 157th District Court of Harris County , to
vacate her Fin ding s and Order on Plaintiff ’ s Motion for Sanctions dated Jun e 8, 2021 , in trial court cause number 2019

- 23106 , styled Vaculik v. Micahel ’ s Store s, Inc. Relator claims the trial court abused its discretion in granting spo liation sanction s

. I n its emer gency motion for temporary relief, relator seek s an order stayin g the commencement of trial set for June 1 4, 2 021 , while the merits of relator ’ s petition are under consideration by this C ourt

. I t appears from the facts stated in the petition that relator ’ s request for relief requires further considera tion and t hat rel ator will be prejudiced unless immediate temporary relief is granted. See Tex. R. App. p. 52.8(b), 52.10.
We therefore ORDER that the proceedings , inclu ding the commencement of trial set for June 14, 2021, of the c ourt below be stayed in trial cour t cause number 2019

- 23106 , styled Vaculik v. Mic h a el ’ s Store s, Inc. Such proceedings a re stayed until final decision by this Court of relator ’ s petition for writ of man damus, or until further orders of this Court. The Court requests a response f rom the re al part ies in interest to the petition for writ of mandamus o n or b efore 4:0 0 p.m., on June 16, 2021

.

PER CURIAM

Order filed June 11 , 20 21

.3 Panel c onsists of Justices Wise, Jewell, and Spain. ( J. Spain dissents to the granting of the stay

. ).
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7858
RICHARD LEE DAVIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus EDWARD F. REILLY, JR., Chairman, United States Parole Commissioner; JEFFREY S. KOSTBAR, Examiner, United States Parole Commissioner, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. W. Craig Broadwater, District Judge. (3:05-cv-00075-WCB) Submitted: March 29, 2007 Decided: April 5, 2007 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Richard Lee Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Betsy S. Jividen, Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Richard Lee Davis, a state prisoner, appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Davis v. Reilly , No. 3:05-cv-00075-WCB (N.D.W. Va. Oct. 20, 2006). 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
EXHIBIT 13.2




Certification Pursuant to


18 U.S.C. Section 1350,


As Adopted Pursuant to


Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002









The undersigned, being the Chief Financial Officer of Northcore Technologies Inc. (the “Company”) hereby certifies that to the best of my knowledge:




(1) The Annual Report on Form 20-F of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011 (the “Report”) which this certification accompanies, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.




(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as at, and for the fiscal year ended on, December 31, 2011.




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


Dated:  March 30, 2012

“Tam Nguyen”Tam NguyenChief Financial Officer


This certification is being furnished solely to accompany this Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and is not being filed for the purpose of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company unless such incorporation is expressly referenced within.
# L_2014310EN.01007501.xml

| 30.10.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 310/75 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.10.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 310/75

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 105/2014

of 16 May 2014

amending Annex XXI (Statistics) to the EEA Agreement

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘the EEA Agreement’), and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EU) No 912/2013 of 23 September 2013 implementing Regulation (EC) No 452/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the production and development of statistics on education and lifelong learning, as regards statistics on education and training systems (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EU) No 912/2013 of 23 September 2013 implementing Regulation (EC) No 452/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the production and development of statistics on education and lifelong learning, as regards statistics on education and training systems (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.

| (2) | Regulation (EU) No 912/2013 repeals Commission Regulation (EU) No 88/2011 (2), which is incorporated into the EEA Agreement and which is consequently to be repealed under the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Regulation (EU) No 912/2013 repeals Commission Regulation (EU) No 88/2011 (2), which is incorporated into the EEA Agreement and which is consequently to be repealed under the EEA Agreement.

| (3) | Annex XXI to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Annex XXI to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The text of point 18wb (Commission Regulation (EU) No 88/2011) of Annex XXI to the EEA Agreement is replaced by the following:

‘
  32013 R 0912: Commission Regulation (EU) No 912/2013 of 23 September 2013 implementing Regulation (EC) No 452/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the production and development of statistics on education and lifelong learning, as regards statistics on education and training systems (OJ L 252, 24.9.2013, p. 5).’

Article 2

The texts of Regulation (EU) No 912/2013 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 17 May 2014, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement have been made (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 16 May 2014.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Gianluca GRIPPA

---

(1)  
  OJ L 252, 24.9.2013, p. 5.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 29, 3.2.2011, p. 5.

2

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
John L. LOTTER, petitioner, v. Scott R. FRAKES, Director, Nebraska Department of Correctional Services.

No. 17-6602.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 22, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

September 11, 2019

No. 04

- 17

- 00810

- CV

CODY, TEXAS, L.P.,

Appellant

v.

BPL EXPLORATION, LTD.,

Appellee

From the 49th Judicial District Court, Zapata County, Texas

Trial Court No. 8,665

Honorable Jos e A. Lopez, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Appellee’s supplemental brief was due July 3, 2019. On July 4, 2019, appellee filed its

supplemental brief along with a motion requesting a one

- day extension of time. After

consideration, we GRANT appellee’s motion and consider its supplemental brief as timely

filed.

I t is so ORDERED on this 11th day of September, 2019

.

P ER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO:

__________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE

, Clerk of Court
CHAO HO LIN, et ux., petitioners, v. TD WATERSTONE.

No. 16-9031.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Court of Illinois, Second District denied.
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)



In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Varian, Inc. for the period ended
October 3, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date of this certification (the Report), the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2003, that the Report fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Varian,
Inc.



Dated: December 8, 2003



|/s/ ALLEN J. LAUER                                                           
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Allen J. Lauer Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer Varian, Inc.



A signed original of this written
statement as required by Section 906 has been provided to Varian, Inc. and will be retained by Varian, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.