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

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4863 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 4863

       To extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2-Methyl-5-
                       nitrobenzenesulfonic acid.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 19, 2007

   Mr. Clay introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
       To extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2-Methyl-5-
                       nitrobenzenesulfonic acid.

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

SECTION 1. 2-METHYL-5-NITROBENZENESULFONIC ACID.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.29.23 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States is amended by striking ``12/31/2009'' and 
inserting ``12/31/2011''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

May 24, 2019

No. 04-19-00322-CR

Sean Anthony JONES,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 6, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 611752

Honorable Wayne A. Christian, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Pursuant to a plea-bargain agreement, appellant pleaded nolo contendere to the offense of 

resisting arrest. The trial court assessed punishment at thirty-nine days in jail with a fine of 

$350.00 and court costs of $422.00. On April 17, 2019, the trial court signed a certification of 

defendant’s right to appeal stating that this “is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO 

right of appeal.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2).

“In a plea bargain case ... a defendant may appeal only: (A) those matters that were raised 

by written motion filed and ruled on before trial, or (B) after getting the trial court’s permission 

to appeal.” Id. 25.2(a)(2). The clerk’s record, which contains a written plea bargain, establishes 

the punishment assessed by the court does not exceed the punishment recommended by the 

prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant. See id. The clerk’s record does not include a written 

motion filed and ruled upon before trial; nor does it indicate that the trial court gave its 

permission to appeal. See id. The trial court’s certification, therefore, appears to accurately 

reflect that this is a plea-bargain case and that appellant does not have a right to appeal. We must 

dismiss an appeal “if a certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been 

made part of the record.” Id. 25.2(d). 

This appeal will be dismissed pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(d), 

unless an amended trial court certification showing that appellant has the right to appeal is made 

part of the appellate record by June 24, 2019. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d), 37.1; Daniels v. 

State, 110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, order).
We ORDER all appellate deadlines be suspended until further order of the court.

_________________________________

Irene Rios, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 24th day of May, 2019.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Susan B. Washer,
certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Applied Genetic Technologies Corporation; and

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to
make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.



|                   |  |  |  |     |  |                                      
|------------------ |  |  |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: May 12, 2015 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Susan B. Washer                  
|                   |  |  |  |     |  | Susan B. Washer                      
|                   |  |  |  |     |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|                   |  |  |  |     |  | (Principal Executive Officer)
STATE of North Carolina v. Joseph L. ROBINSON.

No. 68P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 3, 2005.

Joseph L. Robinson, Pro Se.

William P. Hart, Special Deputy Attorney General, Ronald L. Moore, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 26th day of January 2005 in this matter for a writ of mandamus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Buncombe County:

"Denied by order of the Court in Conference this the 3rd day of March 2005."
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 509 

To apply the Federal Minimum Wage to American Samoa. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 17, 2007 

Mr. KIRK (for himself, Mr. LAHOOD, and Mr. PLATTS) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor 

A BILL 

To apply the Federal Minimum Wage to American Samoa. 

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 ‘‘Minimum Wage for 

5 All Americans Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. APPLICABILITY OF THE FEDERAL MINIMUM WAGE 

7 TO AMERICAN SAMOA. 

8 (a) APPLICABILITY.— 

9 (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 6 of the Fair Labor 

10 Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 206) shall apply 

11 to American Samoa. 


frosa on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•HR 509 IH

1 (2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 6(a) 

2 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 

3 206(a)) is amended by striking paragraph (3) and 

4 redesignating paragraphs (4) and (5) as paragraphs 

5 (3) and (4), respectively. 

6 (b) TRANSITION.— 

7 (1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding subsection 

8 (a), the minimum wage applicable to American 

9 Samoa under section 6(a)(1) of the Fair Labor 

10 Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 206(a)(1)) shall 

11 be— 

12 (A) $3.55 an hour, beginning on the 60th 

13 day after the date of enactment of this Act; and 

14 (B) increased by $0.50 an hour (or such 

15 lesser amount as may be necessary to equal the 

16 minimum wage under section 6(a)(1) of such 

17 Act), beginning 6 months after the date of en18 actment of this Act and every 6 months there19 after until the minimum wage applicable to 

20 American Samoa under this paragraph is equal 

21 to the minimum wage set forth in such section. 

22 (2) SPECIAL RULE.—Notwithstanding para23 graph (1), if an employee is employed in an industry 

24 in American Samoa that, on the date of enactment 

25 of this Act, is required to pay a minimum wage rate 


frosa on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
3 

•HR 509 IH

1 under section 697 of title 29, Code of Federal Regu2 lations, that is higher than the minimum wage rate 

3 required under paragraph (1)(A), the minimum 

4 wage applicable to such employee shall be— 

5 (A) the minimum wage rate required for 

6 such an industry under such section on the date 

7 of enactment of this Act; and 

8 (B) increased by $0.50 an hour (or such 

9 lesser amount as may be necessary to equal the 

10 minimum wage under section 6(a)(1) of such 

11 Act), beginning 6 months after the date of en12 actment of this Act and every 6 months there13 after until the minimum wage applicable to 

14 American Samoa under this subsection is equal 

15 to the minimum wage set forth in such section. 

Æ 


frosa on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
STATE v. JAMES

No. COA04-522

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Filed January 18, 2005

Certification Date February 7, 2005

Case reported without published opinion. Reversed and remanded.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellant, v. O. W. DICKERSON et al.

No. 14609.

United States Court of Appeals Eighth Circuit.

May 12, 1953.

Ellis N. Slack, Sp. Asst. to Atty. Gen., Harry Marselli, Sp. Asst. to Atty. Gen., William W. Crowdus, U. S. Atty., and W. Francis Murrell, Asst. U. S. Atty., St. Louis, Mo., for appellant.

Jay White, W. D. Jones, Rolla, Mo., Leo Lyng, Benjamin Roth, St. Louis, Mo., J. T. Dickerson, Forrest Powell, Edmond, Okl., and Fred C. King, Rolla, Mo., for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from District Court, 101 F.Supp. 202, dismissed, on motion of appellant.
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Justice
 On June 13, 2022, the Department of Justice lodged a proposed Stipulation and Order of Settlement (“settlement”) with the District Court of the Southern District of New York in a lawsuit entitled 
                    *Tzumi Innovations, LLC*
                     v. 
                    *Regan, et al.,*
                     Civil Action No. 21-122. In a counterclaim in this action, the United States seeks, as provided under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (“FIFRA”), a civil penalty and injunctive relief from Tzumi Innovations, LLC (“Tzumi”) in connection with Tzumi's distribution and sale of unregistered pesticides pursuant to FIFRA § 12(a)(1)(A), 7 U.S.C. 136j(a)(1)(A). The proposed settlement resolves the United States' counterclaim, requires Tzumi to pay $1.5 million, and imposes injunctive relief. It also resolves Tzumi's claims against the Environmental Protection Agency in the litigation. The publication of this notice opens the public comment on the proposed settlement. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, and should refer to 
                    *Tzumi Innovations, LLC*
                     v. 
                    *Regan,*
                     D.J. # 1-12610. All comments must be submitted no later than 30 days after the publication date of this notice. Comments may be submitted either by email or by mail: *To submit comments:*
*Send them to:*By email
*pubcomment-ees.enrd@usdoj.gov.*By mail
Assistant Attorney General, U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044-7611.
 During the public comment period, the settlement may be examined and downloaded at this Justice Department website: 
                    *http://www.usdoj.gov/​enrd/​Consent_​Decrees.html.*
                     We will provide a paper copy of the settlement upon written request and payment of reproduction costs. Please email your request and payment to: Consent Decree Library, U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044-7611. Please enclose a check or money order for $6.50 (25 cents per page reproduction cost) payable to the United States Treasury. Henry S. Friedman, Assistant Section Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and Natural Resources Division.


[FR Doc. 2022-13167 Filed 6-17-22; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-15-P
HomeOcean Facts

# What are phytoplankton?

## Phytoplankton are microscopic marine algae.

Phytoplankton is the base of several aquatic food webs. In a balanced ecosystem, they provide food for a wide range of sea creatures. 

Phytoplankton, also known as microalgae, are similar to  terrestrial plants in that they contain chlorophyll and require sunlight in  order to live and grow. Most phytoplankton are buoyant and float in the upper  part of the ocean, where sunlight penetrates the water. Phytoplankton also require  inorganic nutrients such as nitrates, phosphates, and sulfur which they convert  into proteins, fats, and carbohydrates. 

The two main classes of phytoplankton are dinoflagellates  and diatoms. Dinoflagellates use a whip-like tail, or flagella, to move through  the water and their bodies are covered with complex shells. Diatoms also have  shells, but they are made of a different substance and their structure is rigid  and made of interlocking parts. Diatoms do not rely on flagella to move through  the water and instead rely on ocean currents to travel through the water.

In a balanced ecosystem, phytoplankton provide food for a  wide range of sea creatures including shrimp, snails, and jellyfish.  When too many nutrients are available, phytoplankton may grow out of control  and form harmful algal blooms (HABs). These blooms can produce extremely toxic  compounds that have harmful effects on fish, shellfish, mammals, birds, and  even people.

The National Centers for  Coastal Ocean Science conduct extensive research on harmful  algal blooms. Scientists use a range of technologies to predict where and when  HABs are likely to form and how they will affect the areas where they occur. Scientists  use this information to inform coastal authorities on how to best respond in  order to minimize negative impacts.

###### Get **Social**

###### More **Information**

          - NOAA's National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science
          -  Phytoplankton Monitoring Network
          - Harmful Algal Blooms

**Last updated:**   01/18/24**Author:** NOAAHow to cite this article

Contact Us

            - Provide Feedback 
            -  Contact Us 
            -  Report an error 

##### Science. Service.Stewardship.

###### 						About NOS 					

            - About Us
            - NOS Program Offices
            - Media Inquiries
            - Website Acknowledgements

###### 						Resources 					

            - Site Index
            - Disclaimer
            - Freedom of Information Act
            - Accessibility

###### 						More Resources 					

            - Information Quality
            - Privacy Policy
            - NOS For Employees
            - USA.gov

          -  National Ocean Service
          -  National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
          -  Department of Commerce

##### 						Social 					

            - 
            - 
            - 
            - 
            -
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-7717

MICHAEL BOYD,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; JANET RENO; KATHLEEN

HAWKS; W. J. THOMPSON, Warden, FCI Morgantown;

ANN BARTOLO,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern

District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. William M. Kidd, Senior

District Judge. (CA-96-165)

Submitted: June 30, 1998 Decided: August 4, 1998

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Boyd, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel W. Dickinson, Jr., OFFICE OF

THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Michael Boyd appeals the district court’s order denying relief

on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition. We have reviewed the

record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Boyd v. United States, No. CA-96-165 (N.D.W. Va. Sept. 24,

1997). 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
# CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002

I, Roy Wolvin, CFO of Nymox
Pharmaceutical Corporation, do hereby certify that, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the information
contained in the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2004 of Nymox
Pharmaceutical Corporation and filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 and the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations on Nymox Pharmaceutical
Corporation

Date: June 30, 2005

| | /s/
Roy Wolvin           Roy Wolvin           Chief Financial Officer           Nymox
Pharmaceutical Corporation
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STATE v. LIGHTNER.

No. COA04-686.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed April 19, 2005.

Certification Date May 9, 2005.

Appeal from Mecklenburg (02CRS233127, 02CRS233128).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
Exhibit 31.2
CERTIFICATIONS
I, Richard L. Boughrum, certify that:
 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Commerce EnergyGroup, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain anyuntrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect tothe period covered by this quarterly report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this quarterly report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations andcash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented inthis quarterly report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant andhave:
 a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known tous by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this quarterly report is being prepared;  c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, asof the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect the registrant’s internalcontrols over financial reporting; and
 5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
 a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal controls over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal controls over financial reporting.     Date: December 15, 2004 By: /s/ RICHARD L. BOUGHRUM      RICHARD L. BOUGHRUM   Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer   (Principal Financial Officer)
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5.4.

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-10746 Summary Calendar
IN THE MATTER OF LOYD REX CONNER, Debtor,

___________________________________________________________ LOYD REX CONNER Appellant, v. FIRST NATIONAL BANK, HASKELL, Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Northern District of Texas 3:07-CV-294 Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D February 5, 2009 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 08-10746

2 After reviewi ng the record and considering the briefs of the parties, we conclude that the district court correctly affirmed the bankruptcy court order modifying thedebtor’s plan. Based on the district court’s July 11, 2008 thorough Amended Memorandum Opinion and Order, we affirm its judgment. AFFIRMED.
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5081 

To extend the suspension of duty on Desmodur VP LS 2253. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 18, 2008 

Mr. TIM MURPHY of Pennsylvania introduced the following bill; which was 

referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the suspension of duty on Desmodur VP LS 

2253. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DESMODUR VP LS 2253. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.11.82 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 Hexane, 1,6-diisocyanato-, homopolymer, 3,5-dimethyl7 1H-pyrazole-blocked in solvents) is amended by striking 

8 ‘‘12/31/2009’’ and inserting ‘‘12/31/2011’’. 

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

10 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 


smartinez on PRODPC61 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5081 IH

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

2 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on PRODPC61 with BILLS
Exhibit 32.1

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350,

as Adopted Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (the Report), of MoneyGram International, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended September 30, 2012, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof I, Pamela H. Patsley, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       |  |                                                                   
|---------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: November 9, 2012 |  | /s/ PAMELA H. PATSLEY                                             
|                       |  | Pamela H. Patsley                                                 
|                       |  | Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)