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

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3421 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3421

  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the standard 
   mileage rate for charitable purposes to the standard mileage rate 
  established by the Secretary of the Treasury for business purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             August 1, 2008

   Mr. Casey introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the standard 
   mileage rate for charitable purposes to the standard mileage rate 
  established by the Secretary of the Treasury for business purposes.

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

SECTION 1. STANDARD MILEAGE RATE FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES SAME AS FOR 
              BUSINESS PURPOSES.

    (a) In General.--Subsection (i) of section 170 of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to standard mileage rate for use of 
passenger automobile) is amended by striking ``14 cents per mile'' and 
inserting ``the standard mileage rate for business purposes prescribed 
by the Secretary for purposes of this chapter which is in effect on the 
date of the contribution''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2007.
                                 <all>
```
# Commission Implementing Decision of 13 February 2014 suspending temporarily imports from Bangladesh of foodstuffs containing            or consisting of betel leaves (‘Piper betle’) (notified under document C(2014) 794) (Text with EEA relevance) (2014/88/EU)            (repealed)         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Decision

# of 13 February 2014

# suspending temporarily imports from Bangladesh of foodstuffs containing or consisting of betel leaves (‘Piper betle’)

# (notified under document C(2014) 794)

# (Text with EEA relevance)

# (2014/88/EU) (repealed)

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

Textual Amendments

F1Repealed by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/625 of 6 May 2020 amending Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1793                                 on the temporary increase of official controls and emergency measures governing the entry into the Union of certain goods                                 from certain third countries implementing Regulations (EU) 2017/625 and (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of                                 the Council, and repealing Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/943 and Commission Implementing Decision 2014/88/EU                                 (Text with EEA relevance).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN T-NETIX, INC.'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE SIX
MONTHS ENDED JANUARY 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1997
<CASH>                                             205
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,384
<ALLOWANCES>                                       177
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                          43,574
<DEPRECIATION>                                  13,834
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  45,908
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                            290
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            82
<OTHER-SE>                                      25,407
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    45,908
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                17,510
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,416
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 9,060
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 345
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (311)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (311)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (311)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.03)
        

</TABLE>
STATE v. Robert G. MITCHELL.

No. 156P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 23, 2007.

Robert Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, C. Colon Willoughby, Jr., District Attorney, for State of NC.

*374The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 28th day of March 2007 by Defendant for Relief:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference this the 23rd day of August 2007."
Order entered October 17, 2017

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

No. 05-17-01143-CV

IN RE ARTURO SOLIS, Relator

Original Proceeding from the 52nd District Court Coryell County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. C10-11-40751



### ORDER Before Justices Francis, Brown, and Whitehill

Before the Court is relator’s October 16, 2017 “Motion for Appe llate Time Table

Calculations be Made Under Prisone rs Mail-Box Rule Timely Filed Permissible Post-Judgment

Motions on Record.” 1 Based on the Court’s October 9, 2017 opinion denying relator’ s petition

for writ of mandamus, we DENY the motion as moot.

/s/ ADA BROWN JUSTICE

1 Although originally filed in the Tenth Court of Appeals and do cketed as case number 10-17-00286-CR, this original proceeding was transferred to this Court pursuant to T ex. Gov’t Code § 73.001 and due to recusals on the Tenth Court of Appeals. See T EX

. S UP

. C T

. O RDER , Misc. Docket No. 17–9127 (Sept. 28, 2017).
# Commission Implementing Decision of 2 July 2014 setting out measures in respect of certain citrus fruits originating in South            Africa to prevent the introduction into and the spread within the Union of Phyllosticta citricarpa (McAlpine) Van der Aa (notified            under document C(2014) 4191) (2014/422/EU) (repealed)         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Decision

# of 2 July 2014

# setting out measures in respect of certain citrus fruits originating in South Africa to prevent the introduction into and                        the spread within the Union of *Phyllosticta citricarpa* (McAlpine) Van der Aa                     

# *(notified under document C(2014) 4191)*

# (2014/422/EU) (repealed)

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

Textual Amendments

F1Repealed by Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/715 of 11 May 2016 setting out measures in respect of certain fruits originating                                 in certain third countries to prevent the introduction into and the spread within the Union of the harmful organism Phyllosticta                                 citricarpa (McAlpine) Van der Aa (notified under document C(2016) 2684).
EXHIBIT 21.1


MRS. FIELDS' ORIGINAL COOKIES, INC.


     SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES

         Cookies USA, Inc.
         Great American Cookie Company, Inc.
         Mrs. Fields Cookies (Canada)
         Mrs. Fields Cookies Australia
         The Mrs. Fields' Brand, Inc.
         Mrs. Fields' Other Names, Inc.
                              Fairfield Foods, Inc.
                              Airport Cookies, Inc.
                               Pretzel Time, Inc.
                           Pretzelmaker Holdings, Inc.
                              UVEST
                              LV-H&M
                               H&M Concepts of Idaho, Inc.
                               Pretzelmaker, Inc.
                               Pretzelmaker Canada, Inc.
Document Headings

                    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.                  

###### National Science Foundation

In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, as amended), the National Science Foundation (NSF) announced its intent to hold proposal review meetings throughout the year. The purpose of these meetings is to provide advice and recommendations concerning proposals submitted to the NSF for financial support. The agenda for each of these meetings is to review and evaluate proposals as part of the selection process for awards. The review and evaluation may also include assessment of the progress of awarded proposals. The majority of these meetings will take place at NSF, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, Virginia 22230.

These meetings will be closed to the public. The proposals being reviewed include information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including technical information; financial data, such as salaries, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the proposals. These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and (6) of the Government in the Sunshine Act. NSF will continue to review the agenda and merits of each meeting for overall compliance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act. 

                    These closed proposal review meetings will no longer be announced on an individual basis in the                     **Federal Register**                    . NSF intends to publish a notice similar to this on a quarterly basis. For an advance listing of the closed proposal review meetings that include the names of the proposed review panel and the time, date, place, and any information on changes, corrections, or cancellations, please visit the NSF Web site:                     *http://www.nsf.gov/​events/​advisory.jsp.*                     This information may also be requested by telephoning 703/292-8182.                

Dated: August 25, 2005.

Susanne Bolton, 

Committee Management Officer. 

[FR Doc. 05-17220 Filed 8-29-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-6431

CARLTON AUR,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

MARYLAND PAROLE COMMISSION,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-97-

3635-L)

Submitted: May 14, 1998 Decided: June 3, 1998

Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Carlton Aur, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney

General, Richard Bruce Rosenblatt, Assistant Attorney General,

Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on

his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp.

1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion

and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Aur v. Maryland Parole Comm'n, No. CA-97-3635-L (D.

Md. Feb. 25, 1998). We dispense with oral argument because the

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

DISMISSED
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3111 

To implement equal protection under the 14th article of amendment to the 

Constitution for the right to life of each born and preborn human person. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 11, 2008 

Mr. WICKER (for himself, Mr. BROWNBACK, Mr. BUNNING, Mr. BURR, Mr. 

DEMINT, Mr. ENZI, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. MARTINEZ, Mr. THUNE, Mr. 

VITTER, and Mr. VOINOVICH) introduced the following bill; which was 

read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To implement equal protection under the 14th article of 

amendment to the Constitution for the right to life of 

each born and preborn human person. 

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 ‘‘Life at Conception 

5 Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. RIGHT TO LIFE. 

7 To implement equal protection for the right to life 

8 of each born and preborn human person, and pursuant 

9 to the duty and authority of the Congress, including ConVerDate Aug 31 2005 00:29 Jun 12, 2008 Jkt 069200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S3111.IS S3111

erowe on PRODPC61 with BILLS
2 

•S 3111 IS

1 gress’ power under article I, section 8, to make necessary 

2 and proper laws, and Congress’ power under section 5 of 

3 the 14th article of amendment to the Constitution of the 

4 United States, the Congress hereby declares that the right 

5 to life guaranteed by the Constitution is vested in each 

6 human being. 

7 SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS. 

8 For purposes of this Act: 

9 (1) HUMAN PERSON; HUMAN BEING.—The 

10 terms ‘‘human person’’ and ‘‘human being’’ include 

11 each and every member of the species homo sapiens 

12 at all stages of life, including, but not limited to, the 

13 moment of fertilization, cloning, and other moment 

14 at which an individual member of the human species 

15 comes into being. 

16 (2) STATE.—The term ‘‘State’’ used in the 

17 14th article of amendment to the Constitution of the 

18 United States and other applicable provisions of the 

19 Constitution includes the District of Columbia, the 

20 Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and each other terri21 tory or possession of the United States. 

Æ 


erowe on PRODPC61 with BILLS
STATE v. Bobby Ray McCOLLUM.

No. 355P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 3, 2007.

Alexander McC. Peters, Special Deputy Attorney General, Robert F. Johnson, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 7th day of August 2006 by Attorney General to Deem Response to Petition for Discretionary Review Timely Filed:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 3rd day of May 2007."
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as added by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of DXP Enterprises, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certifies that the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated:  February 2, 2010





/s/David R. Little


David R. Little


President and Chief Executive Officer








The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3232 

To authorize and request the President to award the Medal of Honor to 

James Megellas, formerly of Fond du Lac, Wisconsin, and currently 

of Colleyville, Texas, for acts of valor on January 28, 1945, during 

the Battle of the Bulge in World War II. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 8, 2008 

Mr. CORNYN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs 

A BILL 

To authorize and request the President to award the Medal 

of Honor to James Megellas, formerly of Fond du Lac, 

Wisconsin, and currently of Colleyville, Texas, for acts 

of valor on January 28, 1945, during the Battle of 

the Bulge in World War II. 

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


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2 

•S 3232 IS

1 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION AND REQUEST FOR AWARD 

2 OF MEDAL OF HONOR TO JAMES MEGELLAS 

3 FOR ACTS OF VALOR DURING BATTLE OF 

4 THE BULGE. 

5 (a) AUTHORIZATION.—The President is authorized 

6 and requested to award the Medal of Honor under section 

7 3741 of title 10, United States Code, to James Megellas, 

8 formerly of Fond du Lac, Wisconsin, and currently of 

9 Colleyville, Texas, for the acts of valor described in sub10 section (b). 

11 (b) ACTION DESCRIBED.—The acts of valor referred 

12 to in subsection (a) are the actions of James Megellas on 

13 January 28, 1945, in Herresbach, Belgium, during the 

14 Battle of the Bulge, during World War II, when, as a first 

15 lieutenant in the 82d Airborne Division, he led a surprise 

16 and devastating attack on a much larger advancing enemy 

17 force, killing and capturing a large number and causing 

18 others to flee, single-handedly destroying an attacking 

19 German Mark V tank with two hand-held grenades, and 

20 then leading his men in clearing and seizing Herresbach. 

21 (c) WAIVER OF TIME LIMITATIONS.—The award 

22 under subsection (a) may be made without regard to the 

23 time limitations specified in section 3744(b) of title 10, 

24 United States Code, or any other time limitation estabVerDate Aug 31 2005 00:19 Jul 09, 2008 Jkt 059200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S3232.IS S3232

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
3 

•S 3232 IS

1 lished by law or regulation with respect to the awarding 

2 of certain medals to persons who served in the Army. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
EXHIBIT 31.1



Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification



I, Joseph V. Vittoria, certify that:



|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014 of Puradyn Filter Technologies Incorporated; 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.



|              |  |                                                                                                             
|------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|April 1, 2016 |  | /s/ Joseph V. Vittoria
Joseph V. Vittoria, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, principal executive officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-7142

In Re: JULIAN EDWARD ROCHESTER,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

(CA-99-705-20AJ, CA-99-785-20AJ, CA-98-298-20AJ,

CA-97-3924-20AJ, CA-98-146-21AJ)

Submitted: November 18, 1999 Decided: November 24, 1999

Before WILKINS, HAMILTON, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Julian Edward Rochester, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Julian Edward Rochester filed this petition for a writ of mandamus requesting this court to direct a South Carolina state court

to act on a pending post-conviction relief petition. Because we

have no general power to compel action by state courts, we deny the

petition. See Davis v. Lansing, 851 F.2d 72, 74 (2d Cir. 1988).

We grant the motion to proceed in forma pauperis and 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.

PETITION DENIED
STATE v. GALANIS.

No. COA07-215.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed November 20, 2007.

Certification Date December 10, 2007.

Appeal from Randolph (03CRS9291).

Cases reported without published opinion. No error.
STATE v. Darrell Wayne MANESS.

No. 402A06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 13, 2007.

Rex Gore, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 11th day of June 2007 by Defendant for Extension of Time to Serve Proposed Record on Appeal:

"Motion Allowed. Defendant shall have up to and including the 11th day of July 2007 to serve his/her proposed record upon the district attorney. The parties shall then proceed to settle and file the record on appeal pursuant to the provisions of Appellate Rules 11 and 12. By order of the Court in conference this the 13th day of June 2007."
Lamont Alexander WAGNER v. Anthony HATHAWAY, III.

No. 526P04-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 23, 2007.

Lamont A. Wagner, pro se.

*565Joseph Ellis Herrin, Assistant Attorney General, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the application filed by Defendant on the 9th day of August 2007 in this matter for Writ of Habeas Corpus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Forsyth County:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 23rd day of August 2007."