alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
| LIST      OF SUBSIDIARIES                             |   |                        |   |    |
|-------------------------------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------|--------|---------|
|                                                  |   |                        |   |    |
| Name of Subsidiary                                    |   | Jurisdiction ofOrganization |   | % Owned |
| China      Valves  Holdings Limited         |   | Samoa                       |   | 100%    |
| China      Valves Holdings Limited                    |   | Hong      Kong              |   | 100%    |
| Henan      Tonghai Valve Science Technology Co., Ltd. |   | PRC                         |   | 100%    |
| Zhengzhou      City ZhengDie Valve Co., Ltd           |   | PRC                         |   | 100%    |
| Henan      Kaifeng High Pressure Valve Co., Ltd.      |   | PRC                         |   | 100%    |
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

September 19, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

135597 Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r Marilyn Kell y Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. RAQUEL ROBELIN, Conservator, for Stephen J. Markman, TEIJA McCALL, J ustices Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 135597 COA: 279780 Kent CC: 04-010444-NH SPECTRUM HEALTH HOSPITALS, d/b/a SPECTRUM HEALTH-EAST CAMPUS, JOHN HARTMANN, M.D ., and ADVANTAGE HEALTH PHYSICIANS, P.C., Defendants-Appellants.

________________ _________________________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the November 27, 2007 order of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to th e Court of Appeals, for consideration, as on leave gran ted, of whether the trial court abused its discretion when it
denied the defendants’ motion to strike th e testimony of Ronald Gabriel, M.D. In particular, we direct the Court of Appeals to consider whether Dr. Gabriel’s proposed testimony meets the criteria of MC L 600.2955 and MRE 702. See Craig v Oakwood Hospital , 471 Mich 67 (2004), and Gilbert v DaimlerChrysler Corp , 470 Mich 749 (2004).

We do not retain jurisdiction.

K ELLY , J., would deny leave to appeal.

0916 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

September 19, 2008

Clerk
##### 



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 Philadelphia Consolidated Holding
Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
I, James J. Maguire, Jr., chief executive 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 results of operations of the Company. James J. Maguire, Jr.
Franklin SEEGERS, Kenneth Simmons, and James Alfred, petitioners, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-8108.

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.
ANDERSON NEWS, L.L.C., et al., petitioners, v. AMERICAN MEDIA, INC., et al.

No. 18-774.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 25, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
**Exhibit 32.2****SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**In connection with the Quarterly Report of Home Solutions of America, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jeffrey M. Mattich, Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and result of operations of the Company.        Date:  November 14, 2006 /s/ Jeffrey M. Mattich   Jeffrey M. Mattich, Chief Financial Officer
| Date:  May 14,      2010 | By:    | /s/      Jerome J. Gassen                                          |
|------------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                               |   | Name:  Jerome      J. Gassen                             |
|                               |   | Title:  President      and Chief Executive Officer       |
|                               |   |                                                               |
| Date:  May 14,      2010 | By:    | /s/      John J. Letter                                            |
|                               |   | Name:  John      J. Letter                               |
|                               |   | Title:  Senior      Vice President – Treasurer and |
|                               |   |   Chief      FinancialOfficer                            |

----
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4189 

To amend title 28, United States Code, to allow claims against foreign 

states for unlawful computer intrusion, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

AUGUST 16, 2019 

Mr. BERGMAN (for himself and Mr. KIM) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend title 28, United States Code, to allow claims 

against foreign states for unlawful computer intrusion, 

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 ‘‘Homeland and Cyber 

5 Threat Act’’ or the ‘‘HACT Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FOREIGN STATE COMPUTER INTRUSIONS. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 97 of title 28, United 

8 States Code, is amended by inserting after section 1605B 

9 the following: 


khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4189 IH

1 ‘‘§ 1605C. Computer intrusions by a foreign state 

2 ‘‘A foreign state shall not be immune from the juris3 diction of the courts of the United States or of the States 

4 in any case not otherwise covered by this chapter in which 

5 money damages are sought against a foreign state by a 

6 national of the United States for personal injury, harm 

7 to reputation, or damage to or loss of property resulting 

8 from any of the following activities, whether occurring in 

9 the United States or a foreign state: 

10 ‘‘(1) Unauthorized access to or access exceeding 

11 authorization to a computer located in the United 

12 States. 

13 ‘‘(2) Unauthorized access to confidential, elec14 tronic stored information located in the United 

15 States. 

16 ‘‘(3) The transmission of a program, informa17 tion, code, or command to a computer located in the 

18 United States, which, as a result of such conduct, 

19 causes damage without authorization. 

20 ‘‘(4) The use, dissemination, or disclosure, with21 out consent, of any information obtained by means 

22 of any activity described in paragraph (1), (2), or 

23 (3). 

24 ‘‘(5) The provision of material support or re25 sources for any activity described in paragraph (1), 


khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4189 IH

1 (2), (3), or (4), including by an official, employee, or 

2 agent of such foreign state.’’. 

3 (b) APPLICATION.—This Act and the amendments 

4 made by this Act shall apply to any action pending on 

5 or filed on or after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with BILLS
# L_2004339EN.01S00301.xml

| 16.11.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 339/s3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.11.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 339/s3

---

1 November 2004 — New version of EUR-Lex!

europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex/

The new site incorporates the Celex service and provides free and easy access in 20 languages to the largest documentary database on EU law.

---
TOWN CENTER FLATS, LLC, petitioner, v. ECP COMMERCIAL II LLC.

No. 17-1653.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

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

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1343

To provide for the continued maintenance and preservation of Governors

Island, New York, by the Administrator of General Services.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 25, 1999

Mr. NADLER (for himself and Mrs. MALONEY of New York) introduced the

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Government Reform

A BILL

To provide for the continued maintenance and preservation

of Governors Island, New York, by the Administrator

of General Services.

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 ‘‘Governors Island Pres5 ervation Act of 1999’’.
2

•HR 1343 IH

1 SEC. 2. CONTINUED MAINTENANCE AND PRESERVATION OF

2 GOVERNORS ISLAND, NEW YORK, BY THE AD3 MINISTRATOR OF GENERAL SERVICES.

4 (a) REPEAL OF DISPOSAL REQUIREMENT.—The

5 Balanced Budget Act of 1997 is amended by striking sec6 tion 9101 (111 Stat. 670).

7 (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There

8 are authorized to be appropriated to the Administrator of

9 General Services for maintenance and preservation of Gov10 ernors Island, New York, including buildings and other

11 improvements on the island, such sums as may be nec12 essary for fiscal year 2000 and each fiscal year thereafter.

Æ
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Randal Chaise Harty, Appellant

No. 06

- 17

- 00207

- CR v.
The State of Texas, Appellee Appeal from the 188th District Court of Gregg County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 46,602

- A ). Opinion delivered by Justice Moseley, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice Burgess participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court

below

. We affirm the judgment of the trial court

. We note that the appellant, Randal Chaise Harty, has adequately indicated his inability to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED JUNE 21, 2018 BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
# L_2014301EN.01002901.xml

| 21.10.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 301/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.10.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 301/29

---

COUNCIL DECISION 2014/726/CFSP

of 20 October 2014

amending Decision 2012/389/CFSP on the European Union Mission on Regional Maritime Capacity Building in the Horn of Africa (EUCAP NESTOR)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union and in particular Article 28, Article 42(4) and Article 43(2) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 22 July 2014 the Council adopted Decision 2014/485/CFSP (1) amending Decision 2012/389/CFSP (2) and extending the European Union Mission on Regional Maritime Capacity Building in the Horn of Africa (EUCAP NESTOR) until 12 December 2016. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 22 July 2014 the Council adopted Decision 2014/485/CFSP (1) amending Decision 2012/389/CFSP (2) and extending the European Union Mission on Regional Maritime Capacity Building in the Horn of Africa (EUCAP NESTOR) until 12 December 2016.

| (2) | Decision 2012/389/CFSP should be amended to extend the period covered by the financial reference amount until 15 October 2015, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Decision 2012/389/CFSP should be amended to extend the period covered by the financial reference amount until 15 October 2015,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Article 13(1) of Decision 2012/389/CFSP is replaced as follows:

‘1.   The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to EUCAP NESTOR for the period from 16 July 2012 to 15 November 2013 shall be EUR 22 880 000.

The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to EUCAP NESTOR for the period from 16 November 2013 to 15 October 2014 shall be EUR 11 950 000.

The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to EUCAP NESTOR for the period from 16 October 2014 to 15 October 2015 shall be EUR 17 900 000.’

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

It shall apply from 16 October 2014.

Done at Luxembourg, 20 October 2014.

For the Council

The President

C. ASHTON

---

(1)  Council Decision 2014/485/CFSP of 22 July 2014 amending Decision 2012/389/CFSP on the European Union Mission on Regional Maritime Capacity Building in the Horn of Africa (EUCAP NESTOR) (OJ L 217, 23.7.2014, p. 39).

1

(2)  Council Decision 2012/389/CFSP of 16 July 2012 on the European Union Mission on Regional Maritime Capacity Building in the Horn of Africa (EUCAP NESTOR) (OJ L 187, 17.7.2012, p. 40).

2

---
Arthur B. STYLES, petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS.

No. 17-9292.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
In the Matter of DISBARMENT OF Nathaniel H. SPEIGHTS, III.

No. D-3029.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 19, 2019.

Disbarment order entered.
Patti STEVENS-RUCKER, Administrator of the Estate of Jason White, Deceased, petitioner, v. John FRENZ, et al.

No. 18-684.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 4, 2019.

Motion of The Rutherford Institute for leave to file a brief as *amicus curiae* granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT 32.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer  Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code

Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, I, Phillip A. Perillo, the Chief Financial Officer of Insure.com, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:



/s/ PHILLIP A. PERILLO Name: Phillip A. Perillo
Title:Chief Financial OfficerDate: March 5, 2009


A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to Insure.com, Inc. and will be retained by
Insure.com, Inc and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

This
certification accompanies the report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18
of the Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

---



QuickLinks
### Todd Levon, Plaintiff,


### v. BarackObama et aI., Defendants. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FORTHE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Civil Action No.

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

# FILED MAY 212009 Clerk, U.S. District and Bankruptcy Courts

# O~ 

# 0957

Plaintiff, a prisoner, has filed a pro se complaint in the nature ofa writ ofmandamus and
an application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court will grant the application, and dismiss the complaint for mandamus for failure to state a claim upon which reliefmay be granted. 28 U.S.C. 

### § 1915A(b)(1). The plaintiffs complaint is construed to be one in the nature ofmandamus. Forrelief, the complaint seeks an order from this court compelling President Obamato enter an Executive Order making certain changes to a law, and compelling certain prison officials to make certain changes in a treatment program operated by the Federal Bureau ofPrisons. CompI. at 1. The remedy ofmandamus "is a drastic one, to be invoked only in extraordinary circumstances." AlliedChemical Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc., 449 U.S. 33,34 (1980). Only "exceptional circumstances" warranting "ajudicial usurpation ofpower" willjustify issuance of the writ. GulfstreamAerospace Corp. v. Mayacamas Corp., 485 U.S. 271, 289 (1988) (internal quotation marks omitted)); see also Doe v. Exxon Mobil Corp., 473 F.3d 345, 353 (D.C. Cir. 2007) (stating that mandamus is "an extraordinary remedy reserved for really extraordinary

# -

cases") (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Mandamus is available only if"(1) the plaintiffhas a clearright to relief; (2) the defendant has a clear duty to act; and (3) there is no other adequate remedy available to plaintiff." In re Medicare ReimbursementLitigation, 414 F.3d 7, 10 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (quotingPower v. Barnhart, 292 F.3d 781, 784 (D.C. Cir. 2002)). With respect to the first two requirements, mandamus is available "only where the duty to be performed is ministerial and the obligation to act peremptory and clearly defined. The law must not only authorize the demanded action, butrequire it; the duty mustbe clear and indisputable." Lozada Colon v. 

# us. Dep'ta/State, 170 F.3d 191 (D.C. Cir. 1999) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The complaint does not establish eitherthat plaintiffhas a clearright to the relief requested orthatthe defendants have a clear duty to perform a ministerial, clearly defined, and peremptory act. Because the plaintiffseeks mandamus relief, but cannot showthat he is entitled to it, pursuantto 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), the complaint will be dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claimupon whichreliefmay be granted against these defendants. A separate order accompanies this memorandu

Date: /

# 5'

# ~

# 2t't1

2
```
  
 
WHEAT - KANSAS CITY BOARD OF TRADE                                   Code-001612
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 04/13/10          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      159,695
COMMITMENTS
  36,549   33,694   26,871   77,169   70,759  140,590  131,324   19,105   28,371

CHANGES FROM 04/06/10 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      1,398)
     876       38     -743       27    1,872      160    1,167    1,238      231

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    22.9     21.1     16.8     48.3     44.3     88.0     82.2     12.0     17.8

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      172)
      41       42       55       61       59      135      134
```

----

Updated April 16, 2010
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1393 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1393

 To provide wage parity for certain Department of Defense employees in 
                          Texas and Oklahoma.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 13, 1999

Mr. Watts of Oklahoma introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                 to the Committee on Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide wage parity for certain Department of Defense employees in 
                          Texas and Oklahoma.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That notwithstanding 
any other provision of law limiting the amounts payable to prevailing 
wage rate employees (as defined in section 5342 of title 5, United 
States Code) of the Department of Defense, during fiscal year 1999, 
such employees who are employed in the Wichita Falls, Texas and 
Southwest Oklahoma wage areas shall be paid the same wages they would 
receive if they were employed in the Oklahoma City wage area, beginning 
with the first pay period on or after the date of the enactment of this 
Act.
                                 <all>
```
PHILIP MORRIS USA INC., petitioner, v. Elaine JORDAN.

No. 18-551.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 25, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District denied.

Justice KAVANAUGH took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
Exhibit 32.1

Certification pursuant to  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002  (18 U.S.C § 1350)

In connection with the annual report on Form 10-K of ValueClick, Inc. ("the Company") for the year ended December 31, 2007, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof ("the Report"), Tom A. Vadnais, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and John Pitstick, as Chief Financial Officer, each
hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to his knowledge, that:



|Dated: February 29, 2008 |  | By: |  | /s/TOM A. VADNAISTom A. Vadnais
Chief Executive Officer
|------------------------ |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------------------------

|Dated: February 29, 2008 |  | By: |  | /s/JOHN PITSTICKJohn Pitstick
Chief Financial Officer
|------------------------ |  | --- |  | -----------------------------------------------------

---



QuickLinks
**EXHIBIT
      23.2**




**CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**




We
      have
      issued our report dated March 17, 2007, except for the effects of the
      restatement discussed in Note 1 for which the date is September 24, 2007,
      accompanying the consolidated financial statements included in this annual
      report of Titan Energy Worldwide, Inc. on Form 10-KSB for the year ended
      December 31, 2006. We hereby consent to incorporation by reference of said
      report in the Registration Statement of Titan Energy Worldwide, Inc. (f/k/a
      Safe
      Travel Care, Inc.) on Form S-8 (File No. 333-138481) and in this Form
      10K-SB.








/s/
      GRUBER & COMPANY LLC




Lake
      St.
      Louis, Missouri


March
      31,
      2008
Jose Alejandro ACUNA VALENZUELA, petitioner, v. ARIZONA.

No. 18-7224.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 18, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Arizona denied.