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

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 564 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 564

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the financing of 
                             the Superfund.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 15, 2009

 Mr. Blumenauer (for himself and Mr. Pallone) introduced the following 
      bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the financing of 
                             the Superfund.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Superfund Reinvestment Act of 
2009''.

SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF SUPERFUND TAXES.

    (a) Excise Taxes.--Section 4611(e) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 is amended to read as follows:
    ``(e) Application of Hazardous Substance Superfund Financing 
Rate.--The Hazardous Substance Superfund financing rate under this 
section shall apply after December 31, 1986, and before January 1, 
1996, and after the date of the enactment of this subsection and before 
January 1, 2018.''.
    (b) Corporate Environmental Income Tax.--Section 59A(e) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as follows:
    ``(e) Application of Tax.--The tax imposed by this section shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1986, and before 
January 1, 1996, and to taxable years beginning after the date of the 
enactment of this subsection and before January 1, 2018.''.
    (c) Technical Amendments.--
            (1) Section 4611(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 
        amended--
                    (A) by striking ``or exported from'' in paragraph 
                (1)(A),
                    (B) by striking ``or exportation'' in paragraph 
                (1)(B), and
                    (C) by striking ``and Exportation'' in the heading.
            (2) Section 4611(d)(3) of such Code is amended--
                    (A) by striking ``or exporting the crude oil, as 
                the case may be'' in the text and inserting ``the crude 
                oil'', and
                    (B) by striking ``or exports'' in the heading.
    (d) Effective Dates.--
            (1) Excise taxes.--The amendments made by subsections (a) 
        and (c) shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this 
        Act.
            (2) Income tax.--The amendment made by subsection (b) shall 
        apply to taxable years beginning after the date of the 
        enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
* 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. 01-40083 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus JEMELL Q. WELCH, Defendant-Appellant.

________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. L-00-CR-823-1

________________________________________

October 18, 2001 Before POLITZ, WIENER, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Jemell Q. Welch, appeals his guilty-plea conviction for possession with intent to distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (b)(1)(C). He maintains that the trial court’s failure to advise him of the consequences of a supervised release revocation mandates the vacating of his guilty plea. Although Welch is correct that the trial judge did not speak to the consequences of a supervised release revocation,1 United States v. Hekimain , 975 F.2d 1098 (5th Cir. 1992). 2 neither the actual sentence imposed nor the “worst-case” scenario one might envision exceeds the statutory maximum incarceration period of which he was correctly advised. 1 Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.
#### STATE v. GREER

No. 560PA82.

Case below: 58 N.C. App. 703.

Petition by Attorney General for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 allowed 11 January 1983.
#### STATE v. MILLER

No. 40 PC.

Case below: 16 N.C. App. 1.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals allowed 8 November 1972.
1... This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2009-CR-6326, styled The State of Texas v. Josephus Duncan,

pending in the 227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Philip Kazen presiding.

i i i i i i

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-09-00710-CR

IN RE Josephus DUNCAN

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Delivered and Filed: November 11, 2009

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED

Relator Josephus Duncan has filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus, seeking to compel

the trial court to rule on his pro se “Motion in Limine - Enhancement Counts,” “Motion for

Quantitative Weight Analysis,” and “Motion to Set Aside Indictment.” However, Duncan is

represented by retained counsel in the criminal proceeding pending in the trial court for which he is

currently confined. A criminal defendant is not entitled to hybrid representation. See Robinson v.

State, 240 S.W.3d 919, 922 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). A trial court has no legal duty to rule on a pro

se motion filed with regard to a criminal proceeding in which the defendant is represented by
04-09-00710-CR

-2-

counsel. Id. Consequently, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by declining to rule on relator’s

pro se motions that relate directly to his confinement based on the criminal proceeding pending in

the trial court. Accordingly, relator’s petition for writ of mandamus is denied. TEX. R. APP. P.

52.8(a).

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

As of the date hereof, I, Kurt R. Kneip, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that the Annual Report of Inter-Tel, Incorporated on Form 10-K for the fiscal
year ended December 31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information
contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in all material
respects the financial condition and results of operations of Inter-Tel,
Incorporated. This written statement is being furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission as an exhibit accompanying this report and shall not be
deemed filed pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

| |        |  |                        
| | ------ |  | -----------------------
| | By:    |  | /s/ Kurt R. Kneip      
| | Name:  |  | Kurt R. Kneip          
| | Title: |  | Chief Financial Officer
| | Dated: |  | March 12, 2004
Case 1:07-cv-03328-CM-HBP Document 29 Filed 10/09/2007 Page 1 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03328-CM-HBP Document 29 Filed 10/09/2007 Page 2 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03328-CM-HBP Document 29 Filed 10/09/2007 Page 3 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03328-CM-HBP Document 29 Filed 10/09/2007 Page 4 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03328-CM-HBP Document 29 Filed 10/09/2007 Page 5 of 5
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense POW/MIA Accounting AgencyFulfilling Our Nation's Promise

Search
Search

Search

              - 
              - 
              - 

-  Home		 
-  Families		 
-  Our Missing    -  Searchable List of the Missing             
  -  Searchable Map of the Missing             
  -  Recently Accounted For             
  -  World War II      -  World War II Summary             
    -  Battle of Tarawa             
    -  Attack on Pearl Harbor 
  -  Korean War      -  Korean War Summary             
    -  Battle of Chosin Reservoir             
    -  Battle of Unsan             
    -  Korean Air Battles             
    -  The Inchon Campaign             
    -  The Pusan Perimeter             
    -  The DMZ Campaigns             
    -  Korean War Disinterments             
    -  Operation Glory             
    -  POW Camps 
  -  Vietnam War      -  Vietnam War Summary             
    -  Vietnam War Identification Project             
    -  Tet Offensive             
    -  Battle of Khe Sanh             
    -  Mayaguez Incident             
    -  Battle of Ia Drang             
    -  Lam Son 
  -  Cold War             
  -  Gulf Wars & Libya             
  -  Unknowns 
-  News & Stories    -  Our Stories             
  -  Press Releases             
  -  DPAA In The News             
  -  Year In Review 
-  Multimedia    -  Livestreams             
  -  Podcast             
  -  Briefing Videos             
  -  Science Videos             
  -  DPAA Laboratory             
  -  Media Gallery 
-  Resources    -  FAQs             
  -  AFMES DNA Laboratory             
  -  Publicly Released Documents             
  -  Family/VSO Update Notes             
  -  Family Member Guide             
  -  POW/MIA Day Toolkit             
  -  USRJC 
-  About    -  Leadership             
  -  Vision-Mission-Values             
  -  DPAA Organizational Chart 
-  Contact    -  Contact Us             
  -  Join Us      -  Careers 
  -  Report a Site             
  -  Donate to the Mission 
-  Volunteer		 

## News Release

# USS California Sailor Accounted For From World War II (Turk, P.)

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT
#### Grant L. WILLIAMS, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, Respondent.

No. 05-3041.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

March 15, 2005.

*ORDER*

MAYER, Circuit Judge.

Grant L. Williams moves without opposition for reconsideration of the court’s Feb*997ruary 22, 2005 order dismissing his petition for review for failure to file a brief.

It appears that Williams had not been properly served with the certified index (which triggers the date for computing the due date of the opening brief) at the time the court issued its order dismissing his petition for review.

Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The motion is granted. Williams’ petition for review is reinstated, the dismissal order is vacated, and the mandate is recalled. Williams’ brief is due within 60 days of the date of filing of this order.

(2) All remaining motions are moot.
1 The Honorable Richard E. Dorr, United St ates District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 10-3676

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the Western * District of Missouri. Earl Martin Price, Jr., * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: March 31, 2011 Filed: April 8, 2011

___________ Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Earl Price, Jr., pleaded guilty to assaulti ng a corrections officer, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 111(a)(1), (b), and the district court 1 sentenced him to 105 months in prison and 3 years of supervis ed release. His counsel moves to withdraw, and in a brief filed pursuant to Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), he argues that the sentence is unreasonable. In a supplemen tal pro se brief, Price argues that the sentence is too harsh because he is ill and takes medication. He also seeks appointment of new counsel.-2- We conclude that the district court di d not abuse its discretion in imposing the sentence, seeUnited States v. Feemster , 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc), because we find no procedural error or anything to rebut the presumption of reasonableness that attaches to Price’s within Guidelines range sentence, seeUnited States v. Lozoya , 623 F.3d 624, 626 (8th Cir. 2010) (discussing substantive reasonableness); United States v. Linderman , 587 F.3d 896, 901 (8th Cir. 2009) (within Guidelines range sentence is presumed reasonable on appeal).
In his pro se submissions, Price may be suggesting that his guilty plea was involuntary because of his mental condition, but any such argument is not cognizable on direct appeal because Price did not move inthe district court to withdraw his plea. See United States v. Foy , 617 F.3d 1029, 1033-34 (8th Cir. 2010), cert. denied , 79 USLW 3477 (Feb. 22, 2011). Further, we ha ve reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), and ha ve found no nonfrivolous issues for appeal.
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court, and we grant counsel leave to withdraw, subject to counsel in forming Price about procedures for seeking rehearing or filing a petition for certiorari . We also deny Price’s pending motion for counsel.

______________________________
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains restated summary financial information originally
extracted from James River Corporation of Virginia's September 24, 1995, Form
10-Q financial statements as restated in the September 29, 1996, Form 10-Q
financial statements and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
<CIK> 0000053117
<NAME> JAMES RIVER CORPORATION OF VIRGINIA
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-24-1995
<CASH>                                              44
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      907
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        806
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,898
<PP&E>                                           6,055
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,048
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   7,204
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,126
<BONDS>                                          2,457
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        740
<COMMON>                                             8
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,483
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     7,204
<SALES>                                          5,220
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 5,220
<CGS>                                            4,049
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,049
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    26
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 176
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    202
<INCOME-TAX>                                        95
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                105
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       105
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .73
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .73
        

</TABLE>
EX-10.1






AMENDMENT TO 2009 EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN




WHEREAS, the Board of Directors (the “Board”) and the stockholders of the Corporation have
previously approved the Corporation’s 2009 Equity Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) effective as of May
7, 2009; and



WHEREAS, the Compensation Committee of the Board has recommended that the Board adopt and approve
an amendment to the Plan to provide that all grants of Awards (as defined in the Plan) to
non-employee Directors be approved by a committee of the Board comprised solely of non-employee
Directors.



NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT



RESOLVED, that the definition of the term “Administrator” in Section 2(a) of the Plan is hereby
amended in its entirety to read:



“Administrator” means, except to the extent otherwise provided by the Board, the
Committee; provided, however, that all Awards granted to non-employee
(independent) Directors shall be administered by a committee of independent
Directors of the Board, which shall not be subject to management discretion.



RESOLVED, FURTHER, that except as provided above, the Plan is hereby ratified, confirmed and
approved in all respects.



Approved by AMERIGROUP Board of Directors on August 5, 2009
Exhibit 32(a)Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350I, Joseph P. Keithley, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of KeithleyInstruments, Inc. (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:(1) The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended December 31, 2006which this certification accompanies 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, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company./s/ Joseph P. Keithley
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                                                5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted
from the contained quarterly 10-Q and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such Form 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                                             1
       
<S>                                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                       3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                              Jul-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                                 Aug-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                                   Apr-30-1997
<CASH>                                                             742,082
<SECURITIES>                                                     2,728,583
<RECEIVABLES>                                                      254,077
<ALLOWANCES>                                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                 4,542,340
<PP&E>                                                          48,707,816
<DEPRECIATION>                                                  20,435,929
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                  39,693,039
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                            2,727,388
<BONDS>                                                                  0
<COMMON>                                                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                                              0
<OTHER-SE>                                                      25,213,465
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                    27,391,762
<SALES>                                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                 7,343,860
<CGS>                                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                            0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                 6,634,501
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                 520,435
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                    378,890
<INCOME-TAX>                                                       161,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                217,890
<DISCONTINUED>                                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                                       217,890
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                          0.10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                          0.00
        

</TABLE>
J-S64037-18

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

v.

DALLAS RAY VAVRA 

Appellant

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

 PENNSYLVANIA

 No. 3918 EDA 2017

Appeal from the Order November 3, 2017

In the Court of Common Pleas of Northampton County Criminal Division 

at No(s): CP-48-CR-0000809-2011

BEFORE: BOWES, J., OLSON, J., and KUNSELMAN, J.

CONCURRING STATEMENT BY OLSON, J.: FILED DECEMBER 20, 2018

I agree with the learned majority that the serial petition filed by 

Appellant under the Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA) was properly denied by 

the PCRA court. I write separately as I do not believe that this Court should 

consider the most recent appeal. Pursuant to a Judgment Order filed by this 

Court on June 18, 2015 in another appeal filed by Appellant involving 

Appellant’s judgment of sentence at trial court docket number CP-48-CR0000809-2011, Appellant is prohibited “from submitting any additional 

filings for relief in this case without prior permission from this Court.” 

Commonwealth v. Vavra, 2015 WL 6957472 (Pa. Super. 2015), 

unpublished judgment order, at 3 (emphasis in original). As Appellant failed 

to obtain the requisite prior approval from this Court to file this appeal, we 

should summarily dismiss the appeal.
#### JORDAN v. SAUNDERS

No. 245 PC.

Case below: 42 N.C. App. 504.

Petition by defendant Saunders for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 15 July 1980.
Order entered February 26, 2020

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-01589-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF E.W.M., A CHILD

On Appeal from the 219th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 219-53699-2018

ORDER

Before the Court is appellant’s February 23, 2020 first motion for extension 

of time to file his brief. We GRANT the motion and ORDER the brief be filed 

no later than March 27, 2020.

We note appellant’s motion does not include the required certificate of 

conference. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.1(a)(5). We caution appellant that all further 

motions shall include the certificate.

/s/ ERIN A. NOWELL 

JUSTICE
#### HALL v. HALL

No. 111 PC.

Case below: 35 N.C. App. 664.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 6 June 1978.
Case 7:04-cv-08928-KMK-LMS Document 15-8 Filed 01/18/2005 Page 1 of 2
Case 7:04-cv-08928-KMK-LMS Document 15-8 Filed 01/18/2005 Page 2 of 2