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

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5217 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5217

To provide for distribution to States of revenues under the Geothermal 
   Steam Act of 1970 as provided in that Act, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 5, 2010

  Mr. Heller introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide for distribution to States of revenues under the Geothermal 
   Steam Act of 1970 as provided in that Act, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. DISTRIBUTION OF REVENUES TO STATES IN ACCORDANCE WITH 
              GEOTHERMAL STEAM ACT OF 1970.

    (a) Repeal.--Section 423 of the Department of the Interior, 
Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010 (division A 
of Public Law 111-88; 123 Stat. 2961) is repealed.
    (b) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect October 1, 
2009.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

═══════════════════════

Misc. Docket No. 21-9052 ═══════════════════════

__________________________________________________

TRANSFER OF CASE

FROM THE FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

TO THE FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS

___________________________________________________

Pursuant to Tex. Gov=t Code ' 73.001, the following case is hereby transferred from the 

Court of Appeals for the Fourteenth District, Houston, Texas, to the Court of Appeals for the Fifth

District, Dallas, Texas:

Case No. 14-21-00234-CV

In re David Mu

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals will make the necessary orders for the transfer of the case 

directed hereby and will cause the Clerk of that Court to transfer or transmit all filings in the case, 

and verify all orders made, to the Fifth Court of Appeals. Upon completion of the transfer, the 

Fourteenth Court of Appeals shall provide notice of the transfer to the Supreme Court and the State 

Office of Court Administration.

ORDERED by the Supreme Court of Texas, in Chambers,

With the Seal thereof affixed at the City of Austin,

this 6th day of May, 2021.

_______________________________________

BLAKE A. HAWTHORNE, CLERK

THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS
# C_2007091EN.01002401.xml

| 26.4.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 91/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.4.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 91/24

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4577 — Blackstone/Cardinal Health (PTS Division))

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 91/04)

On 3 April 2007, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4577. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4577. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu)

---
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 11**  **- 7072** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. TIMON JEROME MICHAUX, a/k/a Too Short , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Cou rt for the Western District of North Carolina , at Statesville

. Richard L. Voorhees , District Judge. ( 5:00

- cr - 0 0047

- RLV

- 10 )

Submitted : December 15, 2011 Decided: December 20, 2011

Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DAVIS , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un p ublished per curiam opinion

.
Timon Jerome Michaux, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Timon Jer ome Michaux appeals the district court ’ s order denying relief on his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (200 6 ) motion
for reduction of sentence . We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district c ourt. United States v. Michaux , No.
5:00

- cr - 00047

- RLV

- 10 (W.D.N.C. Aug. 4, 2011) . 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
# United States Court of Appeals **For the Eighth Circuit** ___________________________ No. 12-1920 ___________________________ Cathy Sayles lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Continental Casualty Company, Formerly doing business as CNA Group Benefits lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City ____________ Submitted: January 23, 2013 Filed: January 31, 2013 [Unpublished] ____________ Before BYE, ARNOLD, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Cathy Sayles appeals the district court’s 1 adverse grant of summary judgment in her action under the Employment Retiremen t Income Security Act. Upon de novo 1 The Honorable Howard F. Sachs, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.review, seeChorosevic v. MetLife Choices , 600 F.3d 934, 941 (8th Cir. 2010), we find no basis for reversal. The district court is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________

-2-
# C_2007192EN.01000301.xml

| 18.8.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 192/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.8.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 192/3

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4733 — Apax Partners Worldwide LLP/Electro-Stocks Grup SL)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 192/05)

On 10 July 2007, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4733. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4733. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu)

---
1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 43859

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

TAYLOR JOHN KETLINSKI,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2016 Unpublished Opinion No. 745

Filed: October 25, 2016

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada

County. Hon. Timothy L. Hansen, District Judge. 

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of ten years, with a minimum period 

of confinement of two years, for burglary, affirmed.

Eric D. Fredericksen, Interim State Appellate Public Defender; Elizabeth A. 

Allred, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney 

General, Boise, for respondent. 

________________________________________________

Before GUTIERREZ, Judge; GRATTON, Judge;

and HUSKEY, Judge

________________________________________________

PER CURIAM

Taylor John Ketlinski was found guilty of burglary, Idaho Code § 18-1401, and malicious 

injury to property, I.C. § 18-7001(1). The district court imposed a unified sentence of ten years, 

with a minimum period of confinement of two years, for the burglary charge and 180 days for 

the malicious injury to property charge. Ketlinski appeals, contending that his burglary sentence 

is excessive.

Sentencing is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Both our standard of review and the 

factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and 

need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez, 121 Idaho 114, 117-18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014-
2

15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez, 106 Idaho 447, 449-51, 680 P.2d 869, 871-73 (Ct. App. 

1984); State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing 

the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver, 144 Idaho 

722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record 

in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Ketlinski’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
Exhibit 32





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 on Form 10-Q of Ameriprise Certificate Company (the “Company”) for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2019 , as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Abu M. Arif , as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Jason S. Bartylla , as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, 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.










Date:May 1, 2019By/s/ Abu M. ArifAbu M. ArifChief Executive Officer


Date:May 1, 2019By/s/ Jason S. BartyllaJason S. BartyllaChief Financial Officer
**EXHIBIT31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, David A. Tayeh, certify that:

 

1.               Ihave reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Jostens, Inc.;

 

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

 

3.               Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.               Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:

 

a)              designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring this period in which this report is being prepared;

 

b)             evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

c)              disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.               Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

a)              allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

 

b)             anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

 

 
| Date: August  16, 2004 | /s/ David A. Tayeh                               |
|------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|
|                   | David A. Tayeh                                   |
|                   | *Sr. Vice President and Chief Financial Officer* |

 

----
Exhibit 10.8
CONFIDENTIAL
​

Board of Directors Compensation Policy
 ​
This policy sets forth the compensation for non-employee members of the Board of Directors of Zynerba Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Company”) from and after January 1, 2022.  The Board of Directors may change this policy at any time.
	Compensation Element
	Amount
	​
Paid or Granted

	Board of Directors:

•
Director Retainer



•
Lead Independent Director



•
Annual Option Grant



•
Annual RSA Grant



•
New Director Option Grant


	​
$40,000 per year 
$30,000 per year
7,500 options2 3 
5,000 restricted shares2 3 
35,000 options2 
	​
Quarterly1
Quarterly1
Annually4
Annually4
At sign-on5
​

	Audit Committee:

•
Chair Retainer



•
Member Retainer


	​
$20,000 per year
$ 10,000 per year
	​
Quarterly1
Quarterly1

	Compensation Committee:

•
Chair Retainer



•
Member Retainer



	$15,000 per year
$7,500 per year
​
	Quarterly1
Quarterly1
​

	Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee:

•
Chair Retainer



•
Member Retainer



	​
​
$ 10,000 per year
$ 5,000 per year
	​
​
Quarterly1
Quarterly1

	Expenses:

•
Reimbursed


	​
​
	With receipts as submitted



______________________________
​
1Quarterly cash payments are disbursed at the beginning of each calendar quarter for service during the quarter and are subject to adjustment by the Board of Directors from time to time. Prior to the beginning of each such calendar year, directors may submit an election to receive stock options in lieu of quarterly cash payments during that year, in an amount based on the Black-Scholes valuation.  Options in lieu of cash compensation are fully vested on the date of grant.
	2
	All options granted to non-employee directors shall have an exercise price equal to the closing price per share on the date of grant and a term of 10 years.  Upon a termination of service, unvested options or restricted shares expire and vested options remain exercisable for one year.


3The number of shares subject to the annual Option and RSA grants may be adjusted to meet a minimum threshold of $60,000 in value, with options to restricted shares awarded on a 1.5:1 basis.  The number of options will be calculated using the Black-Scholes valuation and the number of restricted shares calculated using the closing sales price of the Company’s common stock on the applicable grant date.
4Annual Option and RSA Grants are made on the date of the Annual Meeting of Stockholders to all non-employee directors in office after the Annual Meeting; Annual Option and RSA Grants vest in full on the earlier of the day before the following year’s Annual Meeting, and the one-year anniversary of the grant date, but vest in full earlier upon a change of control of the Company or the death or total disability of the director.



Exhibit 10.8
CONFIDENTIAL
​

	5
	New Director Option Grants are made on the date that a new non-employee director joins the Board.  New Director Option Grants vest one-third per year beginning on the one-year anniversary of the grant date, but vest in full earlier upon a change of control of Company or the death or total disability of the director.
Exhibit 11


         INTERNATIONAL MULTIFOODS CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

            Computation of Earnings (Loss) per Common Share
                               (unaudited)

               (in thousands, except per share amounts)


<TABLE>

                                                  THREE MONTHS ENDED
                                                 -------------------
                                                  May 27,     May 31,
                                                    2000        1999
--------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                              <C>         <C>
Average shares of common stock outstanding        18,736      18,756
Dilutive potential common shares                      23          91
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Total adjusted average shares                     18,759      18,847
====================================================================

Earnings from continuing operations              $ 4,750     $ 4,562
Loss from discontinued operations                      -      (7,800)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Net earnings (loss) applicable to common stock   $ 4,750     $(3,238)
====================================================================

Basic earnings (loss) per share:
  Continuing operations                          $   .25     $   .24
  Discontinued operations                              -        (.41)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total                                        $   .25     $  (.17)
====================================================================

Diluted earnings (loss) per share:
  Continuing operations                          $   .25     $   .24
  Discontinued operations                              -        (.41)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total                                        $   .25     $  (.17)
====================================================================
</TABLE>

Basic earnings (loss) per share are computed by dividing net earnings
(loss) by the weighted average number of shares of common stock
outstanding during the period.

Diluted earnings per share are computed similar to basic earnings per
share except that the weighted average shares outstanding are increased
to include additional shares from the assumed exercise of stock options,
if dilutive.  The number of additional shares is calculated by assuming
that outstanding stock options were exercised and that the proceeds from
such exercises were used to acquire shares of common stock at the
average market price during the period.
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.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### Office of the Secretary

# AGENCY:

Department of Interior, Office of the Secretary.

# ACTION:

 Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

This notice announces an upcoming meeting of the Delaware & Lehigh National Heritage Corridor Commission. Notice of this meeting is required under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463).

# Meeting date and time:

Thursday, November 10, 2005-1:30 p.m. to 4 p.m.

# ADDRESSES:

Lafayette College, 205 Pfenning Center, Easton, PA 18042.

The agenda for the meeting will focus on implementation of the Management Action Plan for the Delaware & Lehigh National Heritage Corridor and State Heritage Park. The Commission was established to assist the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and its political subdivisions in planning and implementing an integrated strategy for protecting and promoting cultural, historic and natural resources. The Commission reports to the Secretary of the Interior and to Congress.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Delaware & Lehigh National Heritage Corridor Commission was established by Public Law 100-692, November 18, 1988 and extended through Public Law 105-355, November 13, 1998.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

C. Allen Sachse, Executive Director, Delaware & Lehigh National Heritage Corridor Commission, 1 South Third Street, 8th Floor, Easton PA 18042, (610) 923-3548.

Dated: October 24, 2005.

C. Allen Sachse,

Executive Director, Delaware & Lehigh National Heritage Corridor Commission.

[FR Doc. 05-21538 Filed 10-27-05; 8:45am]

BILLING CODE 6820-P-EM