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

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1235 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 1235

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            November 2, 1999

                                Received

                           November 19, 1999

    Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural 
                               Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to enter into contracts with 
   the Solano County Water Agency, California, to use Solano Project 
 facilities for impounding, storage, and carriage of nonproject water 
  for domestic, municipal, industrial, and other beneficial purposes.

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

SECTION 1. USE OF SOLANO PROJECT FACILITIES FOR NONPROJECT WATER.

    (a) Authorization.--The Secretary of the Interior is authorized to 
enter into contracts with the Solano County Water Agency, or any of its 
member unit contractors for water from the Solano Project, California, 
pursuant to the Act of February 21, 1911 (43 U.S.C. 523), for--
            (1) the impounding, storage, and carriage of nonproject 
        water for domestic, municipal, industrial, and other beneficial 
        purposes, using any facilities associated with the Solano 
        Project, California; and
            (2) the exchange of water among Solano Project contractors, 
        for the purposes set forth in paragraph (1), using facilities 
        associated with the Solano Project, California.
    (b) Limitation.--The authorization under subsection (a) shall be 
limited to the use of that portion of the Solano Project facilities 
downstream of Mile 26 of the Putah South Canal (as that canal is 
depicted on the official maps of the Bureau of Reclamation), which is 
below the diversion points on the Putah South Canal utilized by the 
City of Fairfield for delivery of Solano Project water.

            Passed the House of Representatives November 1, 1999.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
```

[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 76 (Wednesday, April 20, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23527-23528]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-08394]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health

National Institute on Aging; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose

[[Page 23528]]

confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable 
material, and personal information concerning individuals associated 
with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a 
clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis 
Panel; MOST4 Osteoarthritis Study.
    Date: May 16, 2022.
    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, 7201 
Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Joshua Jin-Hyouk, Park Scientific Review, 
Officer Scientific Review Branch, NIA (National Institute on Aging), 
GWY BG, Rm 2W200, 7201 Wisconsin Ave., Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 
496-6208, [email protected].

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, Aging 
Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: April 14, 2022.
Miguelina Perez,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-08394 Filed 4-19-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
```
Louis A. HARDISON, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-8139.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 1, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth 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**

|   | 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 the                Company. |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Dated:                ** **                September 28, 2007 |   |   |   |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|
|                                                               |   |   |   |
|                                                               |   |   |   |
| /s/ Jeffrey                W. Flannery                        |   |   |   |
| Jeffrey                W. Flannery, Chief                          |   |   |   |
| Chief                Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer |   |   |   |

----
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 11.0

                    PAMRAPO BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
                -----------------------------------------------


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


                                                           Three Months Ended              Six Months Ended
                                                              June 30, 2000                  June 30, 2000
                                                           -------------------          ---------------------

<S>                                                          <C>                        <C>
Net income                                                      $1,096,955                    $2,181,927
                                                                ==========                    ==========

Weighted average shares outstanding - basic and diluted          2,630,515                     2,656,775
                                                                ==========                    ==========

Basic and diluted earnings per share                            $     0.42                    $     0.82
                                                                ==========                    ==========
</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-7509

TERRENCE WELLS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

MATTHEW LOWERY, Commonwealth Attorney Prosecutor Circuit Court,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at 

Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, Senior District Judge. (1:19-cv-00966-TSE-MSN)

Submitted: March 10, 2020 Decided: March 13, 2020

Before NIEMEYER and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Terrence Wells, Appellant Pro Se. John P. O’Herron, THOMPSON MCMULLAN PC, 

Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Terrence Wells appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 

(2018) complaint without prejudice under Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971), and Heck 

v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994).

*

 On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised 

in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Wells’ informal brief does not 

challenge the bases for the district court’s disposition, Wells has forfeited appellate review 

of the court’s order. See Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The 

informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited 

to issues preserved in that brief.”). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. 

We further deny Wells’ motion for transcript at government expense. We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

 * Because the district court dismissed Wells’ action “for procedural reasons 

unrelated to the contents of the pleadings,” we have jurisdiction over this appeal. Goode 

v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc., 807 F.3d 619, 624 (4th Cir. 2015).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM SILKNET
SOFTWARE, INC.'S CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30,
1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0001079451
<NAME> SILKNET SOFTWARE, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          57,352
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,260
<ALLOWANCES>                                       275
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                62,026
<PP&E>                                           3,659
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,191
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  64,746
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,247
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           155
<OTHER-SE>                                      56,255
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    64,746
<SALES>                                         10,050
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                13,918
<CGS>                                              317
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,716
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                20,212
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    25
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (9,374)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (9,374)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (9,374)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (2.39)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
Charlton BRADSHAW, petitioner, v. Lorie DAVIS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

No. 18-6794.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 19, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 6533** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. MICHAEL CANDA , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Distr ict of Virginia , at Alexandria
. Claude M. Hilton , Senior District Judge. ( 1:07

- cr - 00356

- CMH

- 1; 1:09

- cv - 00589

- CMH )

Submitted : July 22, 2010 Decided: August 3, 2010

Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published pe r curiam opinion
. Michael Canda, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel Joseph Grooms, III, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Michael Canda seeks to a ppeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. A. § 2255 ( West Supp. 2010 ) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1) (200 6 ). A certificate of appe alability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (200 6 ). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable juris ts would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedura l grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Canda has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials3 be fore the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process. DISMISSED
1 

Filed 11/6/14 Bravo Development Group v. Elli CA3 

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED 

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for 

publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication 

or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. 

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT 

(Sacramento) 

---- 

BRAVO DEVELOPMENT GROUP LLC, 

 Plaintiff and Respondent, 

 v. 

SHAHRAM ELLI et al., 

 Defendants and Appellants. 

C073762 

(Super. Ct. No. 34-2012-

00133552-CU-BT-GDS) 

 Defendants Shahram Elli and Sourcis, Inc., timely appealed from an order granting 

the unopposed motion by plaintiff Bravo Development Group LLC for a preliminary 

injunction. The appeal lies. (Code Civ. Proc., § 904.1, subd. (a)(6).) 

 Well after briefing was completed in this case and after we sent the parties a letter 

advising them that we were prepared to render a decision in this case, appellants filed a 

request for dismissal. We grant the request and dismiss the appeal. 
2 

DISPOSITION 

 The appeal is dismissed. Appellants shall pay respondent’s costs of this appeal. 

(Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.278(a)(1), (2).) We direct the clerk of this court to 

immediately issue the remittitur. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.244(c)(2).) 

 DUARTE , J. 

We concur: 

 ROBIE , Acting P. J. 

 HOCH , J.
**Exhibit
        99.2**
 
 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 (the “Report”) on the Form 10-KSB of Stanford
        Management Limited (the “Company”) for the year ended August 31, 2007, as filed
        with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, Glen Macdonald,
        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
                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 Report fairly presents, in all material
                respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the
                Company. 
 
 
 Date:
        November 13, 2007
 GLEN
        MACDONALD
 Glen
        Macdonald
 Chief
        Executive Officer,
 President
        and Director
   -1-
Amin DE CASTRO, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-7256.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 19, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
Jesse COOLEY, Jr., petitioner, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, et al.

No. 18-6288.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 19, 2019.

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
conjunction with the annual report on Form 10-K of International Fuel
Technology, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ended December 31, 2007, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”),





I, Stuart
D. Beath, the 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, to the best of my knowledge:





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





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








Dated:  March
      31, 2008
            By:
            /s/Stuart D.
      BeathStuart
      D. BeathChief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                      10,109,000
<SECURITIES>                                14,756,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,306,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (188,000)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            26,111,000
<PP&E>                                       2,367,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               (343,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              37,739,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,581,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       125,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  34,962,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                37,739,000
<SALES>                                      5,249,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,249,000
<CGS>                                        1,490,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               10,166,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             149,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (4,163,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (4,163,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (4,163,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.42)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.42)


</TABLE>
Dheadry Lloyd POWELL, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-8107.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 1, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.

Justice KAGAN took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
Exhibit 21.1



SUBSIDIARIES OF ASCENDANT SOLUTIONS, INC.



|                      |  |                                      
|--------------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|State of Organization |  | Company Name                         
|Texas                 |  | CRESA Capital Markets Group, L.P.    
|Texas                 |  | Ascendant CRESA LLC                  
|Texas                 |  | ASE Investments Corporation          
|Texas                 |  | VTE, L.P.                            
|Texas                 |  | Ascendant VTE, LLC                   
|Texas                 |  | Doughertys Holdings, Inc.           
|Delaware              |  | ASDS of Orange County, Inc.          
|Texas                 |  | Doughertys Pharmacy, Inc.           
|Texas                 |  | Park Infusion Services, L.P.         
|Texas                 |  | Park-Medicine Man, L.P.              
|Texas                 |  | Fairways Frisco, L.P.                
|Delaware              |  | CRESA Partners of Orange County, L.P.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6436

RONALD ROGERS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JAMES R. VANCAMP; J. KIRK OSBORN; AMOS G. TYNDALL; MICHAEL E. BEALE, Judge; STAPLES HUGHES, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., District Judge. (CA-03-1111-1) Submitted: July 15, 2004 Decided: July 21, 2004 Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ronald Rogers, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Ronald Rogers appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Rogers v. Vancamp , No. CA-03- 1111-1 (M.D.N.C. Feb. 5, 2004). 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.

DISMISSED
Biven HUDSON, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-7587.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 25, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.