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

Calendar No. 61

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 233

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 24, 1999

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

Public Works

MARCH 17, 1999

Reported by Mr. CHAFEE, without amendment

AN ACT

To designate the Federal building located at 700 East San

Antonio Street in El Paso, Texas, as the ‘‘Richard C.

White Federal Building’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

4 The Federal building located at 700 East San Anto5 nio Street in El Paso, Texas, shall be known and des6 ignated as the ‘‘Richard C. White Federal Building’’.
2

HR 233 RS

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal

4 building referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be

5 a reference to the ‘‘Richard C. White Federal Building’’.

Passed the House of Representatives February 23,

1999.

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL,

Clerk.

Calendar No. 61

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 233

AN ACT

To designate the Federal building located at 700

the ‘‘Richard C. White Federal Building’’.East San Antonio Street in El Paso, Texas, as

MARCH 17, 1999

Reported without amendment
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.



## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2008-1559

(Opposition Nos. 91/176,217, 91/ 177,038, 91/176,218, and 91/177,039)

CIPRIANI GROUP, INC.,

Appellant,

v.

ORIENT-EXPRESS HOTELS INC.

and HOTEL CIPRIANI SrL,

Appellees.

Marvin S. Gittes , Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C., of New

York, New York, argued for appellan t. With him on the brief was Timur E. Slonim . Of

counsel were Joseph M. DiCioccio , and Geri L. Haight

.

George B. Snyder , Troutman Sanders LLP, of New York, New York, argued for

appellees. Of counsel was Bennet J. Moskowitz

.

Appealed from: United States Patent and Trademark Office

Trademark Trial and Appeal BoardNOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.



## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2008-1559

(Opposition Nos. 91/176,217, 91/ 177,038, 91/176,218, and 91/177,039)

CIPRIANI GROUP, INC.,

Appellant,

v.

ORIENT-EXPRESS HOTELS INC.

and HOTEL CIPRIANI SrL,

Appellees.



## Judgment

ON APPEAL from the UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE,

TRAD EMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

in CASE NO(S). 91/176,217, 91/177,038, 91/176,218, and 91/177,039

This CAUSE having been hear d and considered, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

Per Curiam (SCHALL, PLAGER, and MOORE, Circuit Judges .)

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

DATED August 11, 2009 /s/ Jan Horbaly

Jan Horbaly, Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

BEAUMONT DIVISION

JUSTIN LOCUST §

VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:23-CV-388 

OFFICER BANGART §

ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE

JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff Justin Locust, a prisoner previously confined at the United States Penitentiary in

Beaumont, Texas, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown

Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), against Officer Bangart. 

The Court referred thismatterto theHonorable Christine L. Stetson, United States Magistrate

Judge, at Beaumont, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this Court. 

On April 23, 2024, the magistrate judge recommended dismissing the action without prejudice

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). To date, the parties have not filed objections to

the report.

The Court received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States

Magistrate Judge pursuant to such referral, along with the record, pleadings and all available

evidence. Proper notice was given to Plaintiff at his last known address. See FED. R. CIV. P.

5(b)(2)(C). After careful review, the Court finds that the findings of fact and conclusions of law of

the United States Magistrate Judge are correct. 

Case 1:23-cv-00388-MJT-CLS Document 14 Filed 06/04/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 41
ORDER

Accordingly, the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the magistrate judge are correct,

and the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [Dkt. #13] is ADOPTED. 

A final judgment will be entered in this case in accordance with the magistrate judge’s

recommendation. 

2

____________________________

Michael J. Truncale

United States District Judge SIGNED this 4th day of June, 2024.

Case 1:23-cv-00388-MJT-CLS Document 14 Filed 06/04/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 42
Exhibit 4 to the Complaint.

Claim 1 Evidences

1.A method

comprising:

Defendant provides symbology (i.e., a QR code), associated with advertisements and at least one website of Macy’s.

Source: Image of Defendant provided QR Code.

Infringement Claim Chart for U.S. Pat. No. US8424752B2 Vs Macy’s (“Defendant”)

Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-4 Filed 12/08/23 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 69
Source: Screenshots taken from portable electronic device, hereinafter a “Smartphone”.

QR Code Scan Decode Action

Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-4 Filed 12/08/23 Page 2 of 8 PageID #: 70
a) capturing

a digital

image using

a digital

image

capturing

device that

is part of a

portable

electronic

device;

Defendant uses, or induces the use of,a camera (digital image capturing device) on a Smartphone that captures the 

digital image.

Source: Screenshot taken from Smartphone.

Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-4 Filed 12/08/23 Page 3 of 8 PageID #: 71
b) detecting

Symbology

associated

with an

object within

the digital

image using

a portable

electronic

device;

Defendant uses, or induces the use of, a Smartphone to detect symbology (i.e., QR code) associated with the 

website of Macy’s.

Source: Screenshot taken from Smartphone.

Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-4 Filed 12/08/23 Page 4 of 8 PageID #: 72
c) decoding

the

symbology

to obtain a

decode

string using

one or more

visual

detection

applications

residing on

the portable

electronic

device;

Defendant decodes, or induces the decoding of, the QR code pattern to obtain a decode string (i.e., hyperlink) using 

the camera application residing in the Smartphone. 

Source: Screenshot taken from Smartphone.

Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-4 Filed 12/08/23 Page 5 of 8 PageID #: 73
d) sending

the decode

string to a

remote

server for

processing;

Defendant sends, or induces the sending of, the decoded string to a remote server for processing. Specifically, the 

Smartphone sends the information associated with the QR code to the Macy’s Server.

Source: Screenshot taken from Smartphone.

Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-4 Filed 12/08/23 Page 6 of 8 PageID #: 74
e) receiving

information

about the

object from

the remote

server

wherein the

information

is based on

the decode

string of the

object;

After the Defendant, or one induced by the Defendant, clicks on the hyperlink that is obtained by scanning the QR 

code associated with the Macy’s website, the Smartphone receives the information and navigates directly to the 

website of Macy’s.

Source: Screenshot taken from Smartphone.

Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-4 Filed 12/08/23 Page 7 of 8 PageID #: 75
f) displaying

the

information

on a display

device

associated

with the

portable

electronic

device.

Defendant sends, or induces the sending of, the decoded string to a remote server (in this case, a Macy’s server) for 

processing.The information is received and it is displayed on the display associated with the Smartphone as shown 

below.

Source: Screenshot taken from Smartphone.

Case 2:23-cv-00583-JRG Document 1-4 Filed 12/08/23 Page 8 of 8 PageID #: 76
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

IN RE FRED T. PARKER 

____________________ 

2011-1421 

(Serial No. 09/815,567) 

______________________

 

 Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office, Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences. 

______________________ 

JUDGMENT 

______________________ 

JANET A. PIOLI, Brinks Hofer Gilson & Lione, of 

Chicago, Illinois, argued for appellant. With her on the 

brief were LAURA A. LYDIGSEN, LUKE A. PARSONS and ROY 

E. HOFER. Of counsel on the brief was RICHARD J.

GODLEWSKI, of Bloomington, Indiana. 

FARHEENA Y. RASHEED, Associate Solicitor, Office of 

the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, 

of Alexandria, Virginia, argued for appellee. With her on 

the brief were RAYMOND T. CHEN, Solicitor, and WILLIAM 

LAMARCA, Associate Solicitor. Of counsel was KRISTI L.R.

SAWERT, Associate Solicitor. 

______________________ 
THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

 PER CURIAM (RADER, Chief Judge, NEWMAN and 

LOURIE, Ciruit Judges). 

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36. 

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

 August 9, 2012 /s/ Jan Horbaly

 Date Jan Horbaly 

 Clerk
I

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 224

To repeal the Federal estate and gift taxes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 6, 1999

Mr. PITTS (for himself, Mr. KNOLLENBERG, Mrs. MYRICK, Mr. PICKERING,

and Mr. DEMINT) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To repeal the Federal estate and gift taxes.

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

3 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF ESTATE AND GIFT TAXES.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subtitle B of the Internal Reve5 nue Code of 1986 (relating to estate, gift, and generation6 skipping taxes) is hereby repealed.

7 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The repeal made by sub8 section (a) shall apply to estates of decedents dying, and

9 transfers made, after the date of the enactment of this

10 Act.

Æ
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 99.2


             STATEMENT OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF FRIEDMAN'S INC.
                       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 Friedman's Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 29, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Victor M. Suglia,
Senior Vice President and 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 results of operations
          of the Company.


/s/ Victor M. Suglia
----------------------------
Victor M. Suglia
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
May 9, 2003
----

|   | (i) | the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended March 31, 2010 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and |
|--------|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (ii) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|--------|------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: May 7, 2010 |   |   | /s/ Kevin J. Bratton                    |
|-------------------|--------|--------|-----------------------------------------|
|              |   |   | Kevin J. BrattonChief Financial Officer |
Christopher LAWRENCE, Petitioner, v. UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL, et al.

No. 19-964.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 23, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
George Calvin BELT, Petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 19-6989

Supreme Court of the United States.

Feb. 24, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District denied.
```
 
 
CRUDE OIL, LIGHT SWEET - ICE FUTURES EUROPE                          Code-067411
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 01/03/12          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 1,000 BARRELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      450,595
COMMITMENTS
  54,582   20,760  111,534  251,470  291,830  417,585  424,124   33,009   26,471

CHANGES FROM 12/27/11 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      2,350)
   8,393    2,733    4,159    6,219    9,793   18,771   16,685  -16,421  -14,335

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    12.1      4.6     24.8     55.8     64.8     92.7     94.1      7.3      5.9

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      114)
      33       16       41       58       56      106      101
```

----

Updated January 6, 2012
`DTCC Repo-US Treasury <30 YR - NYSE LIFFE - NYPC                     Code-045L2T
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 03/12/13                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF $5,000,000)                            OPEN INTEREST:       52,174
COMMITMENTS
   1,893    6,215    1,708   47,176   42,680   50,777   50,603    1,397    1,571

CHANGES FROM 03/05/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      1,138)
     355   -2,934       63      700    4,056    1,118    1,185       20      -47

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
     3.6     11.9      3.3     90.4     81.8     97.3     97.0      2.7      3.0

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       43)
       4        9        7       23       23       32       34`

---

Updated March 15, 2013
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

MARSHALL DIVISION 

HANSHOW TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD. 

et al, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

SES-IMAGOTAG SA et al, 

Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Civil Action No. 2:23-cv-00617-RWSRSP 

DEFENDANTS SES-IMAGOTAG SA’S, SES-IMAGOTAG GMBH’S, AND CAPTANA 

GMBH’S NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE REGARDING INITIAL AND ADDITIONAL 

DISCLOSURES 

Defendants SES-imagotag SA, SES-imagotag GmbH, and Captana GmbH (collectively, 

“Defendants”), provide notice to the Court regarding service of their Initial and Additional 

Disclosures on Plaintiffs Hanshow Technology Co., Ltd. and Shanghai Hanshi Information 

Technology Co., Ltd. Service was made via electronic mail on April 24, 2024. 

Dated: April 25, 2024 Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Eric H. Findlay_______ 

Matthew C. Acosta 

Texas State Bar No. 24062577 

PLATT RICHMOND PLLC 

1201 N. Riverfront Blvd., Suite 150 

Dallas, TX 75207 

Tel. (214) 559-2700 

Fax: (214) 559-4390 

 

Grant E. Kinsel 

Washington State Bar No. 49576 

Perkins Coie LLP 

1201 Third Avenue Suite 4900 

Seattle, WA 98101 

Tel: (206) 359-3516 

Fax: (206) 359-9000 

 

Matthew J. Moffa 

Case 2:23-cv-00617-RWS-RSP Document 35 Filed 04/25/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 421
2 

Perkins Coie LLP 

 1155 Avenue of the Americas 

22nd Floor 

New York, NY 10036 

Tel.: (212) 261-6857 

Fax: (212) 399-8057 

Eric H. Findlay 

State Bar No. 00789886 

FINDLAY CRAFT, P.C. 

7270 Crosswater Ave. 

Suite B 

Tyler, TX 75703 

(903) 534-1100 

(903) 534-1137 FAX 

efindlay@findlaycraft.com 

 

Attorneys for Defendants SES-Imagotag SA, 

 SES-Imagotag GMBH and Captana GMBH 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that the foregoing document was electronically filed with the Clerk of 

Court using the CM/ECF filing system, which will generate and send an e-mail notification of 

said filing to all counsel of record, on this the 25th day of April, 2024. 

 /s/ Eric H. Findlay 

 Eric H. Findlay 

Case 2:23-cv-00617-RWS-RSP Document 35 Filed 04/25/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 422
**EXHIBIT 99.3**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, Michael L. Musto, certify that: 

 

1.  I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Reptron Electronics, Inc.; 

 

2.  Based on my knowledge, this annual report doesnot 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 bythis annual report; 

 

3.  Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this annual 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-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and wehave: 

 

a)  designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made know to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annualreport is being prepared; 

 

b)  evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual report (the “Evaluation Date”); and 

 

c)  presented in this annual reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date; 

 

5.  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): 

 

a)  all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant’s auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and 

 

b)  any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls; 

 

6.  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have indicated in this annual report whether or not there weresignificant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies andmaterial weaknesses.
In Re Mark KILMARTIN, petitioner.

No. 18-5603.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of habeas corpus 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) 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 for the periods presented.
 Date:  May 10, 2010
    /s/ Steven G. BungerSteven G. BungerChief Executive Officer, Mobile Mini, Inc.Date:  May 10, 2010
    /s/ Mark E. FunkMark E. FunkExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer,
Mobile Mini, Inc.
Julian MOZ-AGUILAR, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-7307

Supreme Court of the United States.

Feb. 24, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
EX-10.(a)




	
	EXHIBIT 10(a)

 AMENDMENT TO SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT AGREEMENT 

 
  
 THIS AGREEMENT is made as of the
10th day of February, 2011, by and between VULCAN MATERIALS COMPANY, a
New Jersey corporation (the “Company”), and DONALD M. JAMES (the “Executive”). 

WHEREAS, the Executive has been employed by the Company in valuable executive service to the Company; and 

WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive have previously entered into a “Supplemental Executive Retirement
Agreement” (“SERA”), dated September 28, 2001, which has subsequently been amended; 

WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive desire to amend the SERA to clarify the service cap; 

NOW, THEREFORE, the Company and the Executive hereby agree that the SERA should be, and is, clarified by replacing the flush
text at the end of Section 2.1 with the following, and that the SERA (as previously amended) should otherwise remain in effect: 
 provided, however, that in no event shall the Executive’s “Benefit Service” under the Retirement Income Plan (including the service credited under this Agreement) exceed forty (40) years
of service, regardless of his actual years of service. On and after the date on which the Executive attains forty (40) years of “Benefit Service” under the Retirement Income Plan (including the service credited under this
Agreement) (the “Service Cap”), the service credited under this Agreement shall be frozen. Accordingly, after meeting the Service Cap, the benefit provided under this Agreement shall be determined based on the amount service
credited under this Agreement at the time the Service Cap is met; however, the benefit under this Agreement shall continue to be adjusted thereafter by changes in the Executive’s compensation. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year first written above. 

 

	
	VULCAN MATERIALS COMPANY
	
	By: /s/ Philip J. Carroll, Jr.
	       Philip J. Carroll, Jr.
       Chairman of the Compensation Committee

	  
       /s/ Donald M. James

      Donald M. James




  
 Exhibit 10(a)
Frederick A. McSHAN, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-8688.

Supreme Court of the United States

Aug. 5, 2019.

Petition for rehearing denied.