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

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5520 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on ceiling fans for permanent 

installation. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 3, 2008 

Mr. COHEN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on ceiling fans 

for permanent installation. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CEILING FANS FOR PERMANENT INSTALLA4 TION. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.84.14 of the Har6 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended 

7 by striking the date in the effective period column and 

8 inserting ‘‘12/31/2011’’. 

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

10 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5520 IH

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

2 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
STATE v. Jonathan Denard BOYCE.

No. 129A06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 25, 2007.

Amar Majmundar, Special Deputy Attorney General, Thomas J. Keith, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*380The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 24th day of April 2007 by Defendant to Deem Defendant-Appellant's Brief Timely Filed:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 25th day of April 2007."
Kathryn L. GRAYSON v. HIGH POINT DEVELOPMENT LIMITED PARTNERSHIP and CBL/G.P., INC.

No. 66P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 29, 2006.

John Haworth, High Point, for Kathryn Grayson.

Joseph F. Brotherton, Steven P. Weaver, Greensboro, for High Point Development.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 9th day of February 2006 by Plaintiff in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 29th day of June 2006."
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-25-1999
<CASH>                                       4,217,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               29,292,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   500,000
<INVENTORY>                                 16,348,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            50,805,000
<PP&E>                                      61,085,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              25,556,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              87,683,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       16,470,000
<BONDS>                                      2,072,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        52,400
<OTHER-SE>                                  66,256,600
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                87,683,000
<SALES>                                     75,170,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            75,170,000
<CGS>                                       45,814,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               45,814,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            21,785,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               400,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             152,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              7,247,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                 2,681,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          4,566,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 4,566,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.87
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.86
        

</TABLE>
IN RE R.T.L.

COA06-1089.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed May 15, 2007.

Certification Date June 4, 2007.

Appeal from Cabarrus (99J108).

Case reported without published opinion. Vacated in part; remanded for resentencing.
STATE of North Carolina v. Steven Lee BATCHELOR.

No. 9P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina, First District.

March 8, 2007.

Steven Lee Batchelor, Pro Se.

Derrick C. Mertz, Assistant Attorney General, Frank R. Parrish, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 4th day of January 2007 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 8th day of March 2007."
STATE v. PRINCE

No. COA06-1333.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed June 5, 2007.

Certification Date June 25, 2007.

Appeal from Henderson (05CRS51521).

Cases reported without published opinion. No error.
UTILITIES COMM. et al. v. COOPER.

No. 343P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 5, 2006.

James H. Jeffries, Charlotte, for Utilities Commission.

Jane Lewis-Raymond, for PNGC.

Gina Holt, for Public Staff.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 27th day of June 2006 by Attorney General to Amend Petition for Discretionary Review:

"Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference this the 5th day of October 2006."
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1


                           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                            18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                                  AS ADDED BY
                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Boca Resorts, Inc.
(the "Company") for the year ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned
hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as added by Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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


/s/ H. Wayne Huizenga
---------------------
H. Wayne Huizenga
Chairman (Principal Executive Officer)
September 27, 2002



/s/ William M. Pierce
---------------------
William M. Pierce
Senior Vice President, Treasurer and
Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
September 27, 2002
##### 



BUSINESS OBJECTS S.A.
 CHANGE OF CONTROL SEVERANCE AGREEMENT
 
 RECITALS
     AGREEMENT
  Term of Agreement




---



##### 



Employment Agreement
 Severance Benefits
 Involuntary Termination Other than for Cause or Voluntary Termination for Good Reason
Following a Change of Control e
 Severance Payment Convention Collective
 Options;
 et seq. et seq. TM
  -2-




---



##### 



Continued Employee Benefits (invalidité et incapacité du travail)
 Timing of Severance Payments
 Voluntary Resignation; Termination for Cause
 Termination Apart from Change of Control
 Exclusive Remedy
 Definition of Terms
  -3-




---



##### 



(a) Cause nolo contendere
 (b) Change of Control
     (c) Good Reason
  -4-




---



##### 



5. Successors
 The Companys Successors
  -5-




---



##### 



6. Notice
 (a) General
 (b) Notice of Termination
 8. Miscellaneous Provisions
 (a) Accounting and Tax treatments
 (b) No Duty to Mitigate
 (c) Waiver
 (d) Headings
  -6-




---



##### 



Entire Agreement
 Termination of [       ] Agreement
 Choice of Law
 Severability
 Withholding
 Counterparts
 REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
  -7-




---



##### 



COMPANY
    
    BUSINESS OBJECTS S.A.By:John G. SchwarzTitle:
    
    Chief Executive OfficerEMPLOYEE
    
    By:Title:
  -8-
# Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed July 20, 2022

. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D22

- 0909

Lower Tribunal No. F96

- 21553

________________



### La Venston Lamont Horne

, Appellant

,

vs.



### The State of Florida

, Appellee

.

A n Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami

- Dade County, Ramiro C. Areces, Judge

.

La Venston Lamont Horne

, in proper person

.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General , for appellee

.

Bef ore LOGUE, HENDON and BOKOR , JJ.

PER CURIAM.2 Finding no preliminary basis for reversal, we summarily affirm the order

on appeal. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.315(a).

Affirmed.
Superior Court

of the

State of Delaware

Jan R. Jurden Leonard L. Williams Justice Center

President Judge 500 North King Street, Suite 10400

Wilmington, Delaware 19801

- 3733

Telephone (302) 255

- 0654

Date Submitted: May 2, 2022

Date Decided: July 21 , 202 2

Richard Davis

SBI # 00 096128

JTVCC

181 Paddock R oad

Smyrna , DE 19 9 77

RE: State of Delaware v. Richard Davis ID No. 8500208 7DI

Dear M r. Davis :

The Court is in receipt of your “ Motion for Redress of Postconviction Review

Under Superior Court Civil Rules of Procedure, Rules 59(e) and 60(b)(3)” dated

April 26, 2022, and filed filed on May 2, 2022

. 1 In your latest motion, you reargue

the same “conflict of interest” argument raised in your second motion for

postconviction relief. 2

Motions for reargument are governed by Superior Court Rule of Civil

Procedure 59(e). Rule 59(e) states “[a] motion for reargument shall be served and

filed within 5 days after the filing of the Court’s opinion or decision.” 3 Here, the

Court issued its Order summarily dismissing your second motion for postconviction

1 D.I. 58. Based on Defendant’s reference to Superior Court Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e), the

Court construes this as a m otion for r eargument.

2 D.I. 55. Defendant’s second motion for postconviction relief was summarily d ismissed by the

Court as untimely and procedurally barred

. See D.I. 57.

3 Super. Ct. Civ. R. 59(e) (emphasis added).relief on April 13, 2022. 4 Your motion was not filed until May 2, 2022. Y our motion

for reargumen t is DENIED as untimely. 5

IT IS SO ORDERED

.

Very truly yours,

/ s/ J a n R. Jurden

Jan R. Jurden

President Judge

JRJ:mls

cc: Prothonotary

Joseph S. Grubb , DAG

4 D.I. 57.

5 See Webb v. State , 911 A.2d 804 (Table) (Del. 2 006) (affirming the Superior Court’s denial of

defendant’s motion for reargument because it was not filed until nearly three weeks after the

Superior Court denied defendant’s motion for postconviction relief).
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         659,042
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,564,323
<ALLOWANCES>                                   195,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,197,360
<PP&E>                                       4,828,922
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,585,717
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,496,284
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,714,512
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     6,592,846
<OTHER-SE>                                   (163,534)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,496,284
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            15,253,893
<CGS>                                        8,388,921
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               15,988,772
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           (167,834)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (567,045)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (215,500)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (351,545)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (351,545)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0




</TABLE>
# Regulation (EU) No 528/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (repealed)Show full title

Regulation (EU) No 528/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 June 2013 amending Regulation (EC) No 450/2008            laying down the Community Customs Code (Modernised Customs Code) as regards the date of its application (repealed)         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Regulation (EU) No 528/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council

# of 12 June 2013

# amending Regulation (EC) No 450/2008 laying down the Community Customs Code (Modernised Customs Code) as regards the date                        of its application (repealed)                     

F1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                        

Textual Amendments

F1Repealed by Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 October 2013 laying down the Union Customs                                 Code.
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporationby reference in the Registration Statements on Forms S-8 (Nos. 333-152680, 333-145007, 333-136452, 333-127541, 333-125043, 333-109170, 333-92254, 333-63132, 333-42588, 333-84497, 333-74991, 333-27097, ) of Cerus Corporation pertaining to the 1996Equity Incentive Plan, Employee Stock Purchase Plan, 1998 Non-Officer Stock Option Plan and 1999 Equity Incentive Plan, and in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-93481, 333-47224, 333-61460, 333-61910, 333-67286, 333-75413, 333-72185,333-154842, and 333-161214) and the related Prospectuses of Cerus Corporation of our reports dated March 16, 2011, with respect to the financial statements of Cerus Corporation and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reportingof Cerus Corporation, included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2010. 

/s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP 

San Jose, California 

March 16, 2011
84 Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation — Defense Spending by State, FY 2020

NORTH CAROLINA 

#14 #24 2.4% $1,354 #19 #4 #6 

$14.4 B SPENT IN 2.4% OF STATE GDP OF TOTAL U.S. PER RESIDENT $6.9 B CONTRACT 144,130 NUMBER $7.5 B PERSONNEL 

STATE DEFENSE SPENDING SPENDING OF PERSONNEL SPENDING 

, DEFENSE CONTRACTS

By Type 

Supplies and

Equipment: 29% Construction: 25%

Research and

Development: 2%

Service: 44%

By Service 

Army

28%

Navy/Marines

53%

Air Force

3%

Other Defense

16%

DEFENSE PERSONNEL 

Allocations, By Type

Reserve: 7%

National Guard: 8%

Active 

Civilian: 16%

Duty: 69%

Allocations, By Service 

Army

50%

Navy/Marines

40%

Air Force

7%

Other Defense

2%

Top Defense Contractors 

Walsh Group

Whiting-Turner Contracting Co.

GlaxoSmithKline

BWX Technologies

Environmental Chemical Corp.

Quantico Tactical

RQ-WM Jordan, JV

RQ-DPR, JV

Duke Energy Corp.

Booz Allen Hamilton

Top Defense Personnel Locations

(M = millions)

$579.3 M

$362.6 M

$342.3 M

$338.6 M

$248.6 M

$240.0 M

$191.1 M

$139.7 M

$130.6 M

$129.9 M

Contract Awards Performed (By Fiscal Year, billions)

$6.9

$5.2

$4.1 $3.6 $3.7 $2.9 $2.7 $2.7

FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20

$7.5 BILLION 144,130

TOTAL PAYROLL TOTAL PERSONNEL 

Reserve Total

2,216 61,002

462 42,105

24 11,333

1,489 7,093

2,191 4,779

1,076 3,379

861 1,614

442 ND

0 674

ND ND

County

Cumberland

Onslow

Craven

Wayne

Wake

Mecklenburg

Guilford

New Hanover

Caldwell

Durham

Active Civilian National

Duty Guard

47,362 10,764 660

37,624

6,275

4,515

601

208

40

ND

499

30

3,945 74

4,899 135

805 284

746 1,241

435 1,660

141 572

328 144

30 145

137 344
(M=millions)

(M=millions) (M=millions)

NORTH CAROLINA FISCAL YEAR 2018 FISCAL YEAR 2018

FISCAL YEAR 2020 

TOP DEFENSE PERSONNEL SPENDING LOCATIONS 

TOP DEFENSE CONTRACT SPENDING LOCATIONS (M = millions, B = billions)

Onslow

Cumberland

Craven

Mecklenburg

Durham

Hoke

Guilford

Wake

Rockingham

Wayne

(M = millions, B = billions)

$2.4 B

$1.3 B

$855.1 M

$517.5 M

$384.3 M 

$243.2 M

$213.6 M

$184.2 M

$86.0 M

$71.5 M

Cumberland

Onslow

Craven

Wayne

Wake

Mecklenburg

Guilford

New Hanover

Durham

Caldwell

$4.0 B

$1.6 B

$602.9 M

$354.2 M

$181.1 M

$127.2 M

$49.7 M

$39.8 M

$36.7 M

$23.3 M

Rockingham

Guilford

Cumberland Hoke

Wake

MecklenburMecklenburg

Durham

Wayne

Onslow

Craven

Onslow

Craven

Cumberland

Wayne

Wake

Durham

Guilford

MecklenburMecklenburg

New Hanover

Caldwell

Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation — Defense Spending by State, FY 2020 85

AF Active AF Guard AF Reserve Army Active Army Guard Army Reserve MC Active Navy Active WHS
<page>


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 Marketing Worldwide, Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending JUNE 30, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael
Winzkowski, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my
knowledge that:

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

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

                                                   /s/ Michael Winzkowski
                                                   -----------------------
                                                   Michael Winzkowski
                                                   Chief Executive Officer
                                                   August 14, 2008
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS 

No. 17-1929V 

Filed: September 28, 2018 

UNPUBLISHED 

KATHERINE J. RADER,

 Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES,

 Respondent.

Special Processing Unit (SPU); 

Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;

Table Injury; Tetanus Diphtheria 

acellular Pertussis (Tdap) Vaccine;

Brachial Neuritis

Kathleen Margaret Loucks, Lommen Abdo Law Firm, Minneapolis, MN, for petitioner. 

Glenn Alexander MacLeod, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for 

respondent. 

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master: 

 On December 12, 2017, petitioner filed a petition for compensation under the 

National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.,

2

 (the 

“Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that, as a result of a Tetanus-diphtheria-acellular 

pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccination administered in her left deltoid on September 28, 2016, 

she suffered “left shoulder injuries.” Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the 

Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. 

On September 24, 2018, respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he 

concedes that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 

 

1

 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the 

undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with 

the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of 

Electronic Government Services). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to 

identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an 

unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits 

within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access. 

2

 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for 

ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 

300aa (2012).
2 

4(c) Report at 1. Specifically, respondent states that “based upon the record as it now 

stands, petitioner satisfies the legal prerequisites for an award of compensation under 

the Act for her [Brachial Neuritis] injury. Id. at 2. 

 

In view of respondent’s position and the evidence of record, the 

undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 s/Nora Beth Dorsey 

 Nora Beth Dorsey 

 Chief Special Master
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1997
<CASH>                                       7,518,971
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  375,424
<ALLOWANCES>                                    10,000
<INVENTORY>                                  3,202,191
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            11,578,298
<PP&E>                                      20,859,648
<DEPRECIATION>                              10,889,102
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              21,842,717
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,317,909
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         4,385
<OTHER-SE>                                  13,154,051
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                21,842,717
<SALES>                                     24,847,931
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            24,847,931
<CGS>                                       16,340,375
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               16,340,375
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             6,321,129
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             677,746
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,508,681
<INCOME-TAX>                                   603,472
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            905,209
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   905,209
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.26
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.26
        


</TABLE>