alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
99th Congress, 2d Session House Document 99-166

VETO OF H.R. 2466

MESSAGE

FROM

THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

TRANSMITTING

HIS VETO OF H.R. 2466, A BILL TO MAKE MISCELLANEOUS 

CHANGES IN LAWS AFFECTING THE UNITED STATES COAST 

GUARD, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

F e b r u a r y 18, 1986.—Message and accompanying papers referred to the 

Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries and ordered to be printed

71-011 O

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

WASHINGTON : 1986
To the House of Representatives:

I am returning herewith without my approval H.R. 2466, a bill “To make miscellaneous changes in laws affecting the United States Coast Guard, and for other purposes.” This legislation was originally intended to make technical and editorial corrections to subtitle II of title 46 of the United States Code. These corrections were necessitated by errors made in the codification of that title in 1983. This bill contains sections that I do support; however, provisions were added that I simply cannot 

support. Improving the management of the Federal government has been, and remains, a fundamental goal of my Administration. But close cooperation between our branches of government is critical if we are to conduct our affairs in a businesslike fashion. Far from giving the Executive branch requisite flexibility to manage efficiently, it creates significant new impediments and contains unwarranted pri­ vate relief provisions that would set highly undesirable precedents. For example, the bill would require that any funds expended under the Truman-Hobbs Act by the Coast Guard to alter the Bur­ lington-Northern Railroad bridge be subject to the requirements of the Davis-Bacon Act, adding approximately $1.5 million to the cost of the project. It would prohibit the trial contracting out of certain aids to navigation functions on the Intracoastal Waterway in New Jersey, significantly diminishing the scope of this project. It would establish two unnecessary advisory committees, and exempt certain Coast Guard facilities from personnel ceilings. It would also reimburse the owners of a bridge in Texas for costs of alterations that under current law are nonreimbursable. Finally, the bill would grant a specific vessel an inappropriate exception to the Merchant Marine Act of 1936, relieving that vessel of its statu­ tory duty to repay a construction differential subsidy. Both of these provisions would discriminate unfairly and inequitably against those similarly situated. At a time when we are taking difficult steps to reduce the budget deficit, this strikes me as especially unwise. For these reasons I am compelled to return H.R. 2466 without my approval. Ronald Reagan.

The White House, February 14, 1986.

(l)
<PAGE>
                                                                     Exhibit 3.5

                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT

                                 TO THE BYLAWS

                                       OF

                        MICROCIDE PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

        The undersigned, being the duly acting and appointed Secretary of
Microcide Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), hereby
certifies that the Board of Directors of the Company amended Article III,
Section 3.2 of the Bylaws of the Company to read in its entirety as follows,
effective as of the date set forth below:

        "3.2 THE NUMBER OF DIRECTORS

        The board of directors shall consist of eight (8) members. The number of
     directors may be changed by an amendment to this bylaw, duly adopted by the
     board of directors or by the stockholders, or by a duly adopted amendment
     to the certificate of incorporation; provided, however, that the number of
     directors may not be increased without the prior written consent of the
     holders of at least 75% of the outstanding shares of Series B convertible
     redeemable preferred stock. The directors shall be divided into three
     classes, with (i) the term of office of the Class I directors,  which class
     shall consist of three directors, expiring at the 2003 annual meeting of
     stockholders; (ii) the term of office of the Class II directors, which
     class shall consist of three directors, expiring at the 2004 annual meeting
     of stockholders; and (iii) the term of office of the Class III directors,
     which class shall consist of two directors, expiring at the 2002 annual
     meeting of stockholders; and thereafter for each such term to expire at
     each third succeeding annual meeting of stockholders held after such
     election."

Dated: October 24, 2001



                                                    /s/ Alan C. Mendelson
                                                    ---------------------------
                                                    Alan C Mendelson, Secretary
Exhibit 32.1
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. section1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Certified Technologies Corporation
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2007, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Michael Friess, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. section1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d),
as applicable, 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.



BY(Signature)                         /s/ Michael Friess
(Name and Title)                      Michael Friess, President,
                                      Chief  Executive Officer
(Date)                                November 13, 2007
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2651 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2651

 To suspend temporarily the duty on machines, and their parts, for use 
         in the manufacture of digital versatile discs (DVDs).

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 25, 2000

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To suspend temporarily the duty on machines, and their parts, for use 
         in the manufacture of digital versatile discs (DVDs).

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

SECTION 1. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF DUTY.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

      

``    9902.84.03    Machines or       Free              No change         No change         On or before 12/
                     mechanical                                                              31/03            ''
                     appliances,                                                                               .
                     whether
                     imported
                     separately or
                     as an entirety,
                     and parts
                     thereof, for
                     use in the
                     manufacture of
                     digital
                     versatile discs
                     (DVDs)
                     (provided for
                     in subheading
                     8462.41.00)....

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-01-1997
<CASH>                                          52,955
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   55,278
<ALLOWANCES>                                    13,083
<INVENTORY>                                    435,666
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               600,607
<PP&E>                                       1,080,079
<DEPRECIATION>                                 255,999
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,572,863
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          305,196
<BONDS>                                        591,841
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     528,670
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,572,863
<SALES>                                      1,944,862
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,944,862
<CGS>                                        1,347,653
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,347,653
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              72,215
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 37,165
<INCOME-TAX>                                       275
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             36,890
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               (12,746)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    24,144
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D19-1019

_____________________________

BRIAN M. CASEY,

Petitioner,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

Respondent.

_____________________________

Petition for Writ of Prohibition—Original Jurisdiction.

May 16, 2019

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of prohibition is denied on the merits.

ROBERTS, RAY, and WINSOR, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

Brian M. Casey, pro se, Petitioner.
2

Kenneth S. Steely, General Counsel, Department of Corrections, 

Tallahassee, for Respondent.
**Exhibit 8.1****Exhibit 8.1**               **Direct or**       **Indirect**     **Jurisdiction of** **Equity** **Name of subsidiary** **Main business** **incorporation** **Interest** Hui Ying Investment Ltd. Holding company Taiwan, R.O.C.  100      %Run Hong Investment Ltd. Holding company Taiwan, R.O.C.  100      %Macronix America, Inc. Sales and marketing California, U.S.A.  100      %Macronix Europe N.V. Sales and marketing Belgium  100      %Macronix (B.V.I.) Co., Ltd. Holding company British Virgin Islands  100%New Trend Technology Inc. IC design California, U.S.A.  100      %Macronix Pte Ltd.  Sales and marketing Singapore  100      %MaxNova Inc. IC design Taiwan, R.O.C.  92.25      %Macronix Japan (Cayman Islands) Holding company Cayman Islands  100      %Macronix (Hong Kong) Co., Ltd. Sales and marketing Hong Kong  100      %Macronix Microelectronics (Suzhou)Co., Ltd System Solution Suzhou China  100      %Biomorphic Microsystems Corporation IC design Taiwan, R.O.C  54.77      %MaxRise Inc. IC design Taiwan, R.O.C  100      %Modiotek Co.,Ltd. IC design Taiwan, R.O.C  100      %Infomax Communication Co.,Ltd. IC design Taiwan, R.O.C  100      %Mxtran Inc. IC design Taiwan, R.O.C  100      %Gateway Silicon Inc. IC design Taiwan, R.O.C  100      %
Exhibit 23-1

                           TLC Laser Eye Centers Inc.
                     Form 10-K Amendment No. 1- Exhibit 23.1
                               Consent of Auditors

                  Consent of Independent Chartered Accountants

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form S-8 (No.333-8162) and Form S-8 (No. 333-55480) of TLC Laser Eye Centers
Inc. of our report dated July 6, 2001 (except as to Note 20 which is as at
August 27, 2001), on the Consolidated Financial Statements of TLC Laser Eye
Centers Inc. as at May 31, 2001 and 2000 and for each of the years in the three
(3) year period ended May 31, 2001 prepared in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States included in the 2001 Annual
Report (Form 10-K Amendment No. 1) of TLC Laser Eye Centers Inc.


Toronto, Canada                                           /s/  Ernst & Young LLP
September 28, 2001                                        Chartered Accountants
EXHIBIT 11

ROOM PLUS, INC.

Computation of Earnings per Common Share
(See Note 1 of Notes to Financial Statements)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                      Years Ended December 31   
                                                      -----------------------   
                                                      1998               1997   
                                                      ----               ----   
<S>                                                <C>               <C>        
Basic/diluted loss per share
Net loss applicable to common stock                $(2,774,792)      $(1,900,051)
                                                   ===========       ===========

Total common shares and equivalent common shares     4,385,000         4,385,000
                                                   ===========       ===========

Basic/diluted loss per common share                $      (.63)      $      (.43)
                                                   ===========       ===========
</TABLE>

Computation of dilutive loss per share would have an anti-dilutive effect.



<PAGE>



SIGNATURES

In accordance with Section 13 or 15 (d) of the Exchange Act, the registrant
caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly
authorized.

ROOM PLUS, INC.


Date:     April 15, 1999          By: /s/ Ronald A.  Kaplan 
                                      ----------------------
                                      Ronald A. Kaplan, Chief Executive Officer


In accordance with the Exchange Act, this report has been signed below by the
following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the
dates indicated.

           Signature and Title                            Date
           -------------------                            ----


By:        /s/ David A.  Belford                          April 15, 1999
           ----------------------
           Name:  David A. Belford
           Title: Chairman of the Board



By:        /s/ Ronald A.  Kaplan                          April 15, 1999
           ----------------------
           Name:  Ronald A. Kaplan
           Title: Chief Executive Officer, Director



By:        /s/ Marc Zucker                                April 15, 1999
           ----------------------
           Name:  Marc Zucker
           Title: President-Merchandising, Director



By:        /s/ Allan Socher                               April 15, 1999
           ----------------------
           Name:  Allan Socher
           Title: President-Advertising, Director



By:        /s/ Jay H. Goldberg                            April 15, 1999
           ----------------------
           Name:  Jay H. Goldberg
           Title: Chief Financial Officer and
                  Chief Accounting Officer
---

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 Annual
Report of China Longyi Group International Holdings Limited (the Company) on
Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jie Chen,
President and 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,
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/
      Jie Chen                       
| | -----------------------------------------
| | Jie Chen                                 
| | President & Chief Executive
      Officer

April 15, 2010

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to China Longyi Group International Holdings Limited and
will be retained by China Longyi Group International Holdings Limited and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.

The forgoing certification is being furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being
filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the
Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general
incorporation language in such filing.

---
(function ($) {

/**
 * Retrieves the summary for the first element.
 */
$.fn.drupalGetSummary = function () {
  var callback = this.data('summaryCallback');
  return (this[0] && callback) ? $.trim(callback(this[0])) : '';
};

/**
 * Sets the summary for all matched elements.
 *
 * @param callback
 *   Either a function that will be called each time the summary is
 *   retrieved or a string (which is returned each time).
 */
$.fn.drupalSetSummary = function (callback) {
  var self = this;

  // To facilitate things, the callback should always be a function. If it's
  // not, we wrap it into an anonymous function which just returns the value.
  if (typeof callback != 'function') {
    var val = callback;
    callback = function () { return val; };
  }

  return this
    .data('summaryCallback', callback)
    // To prevent duplicate events, the handlers are first removed and then
    // (re-)added.
    .unbind('formUpdated.summary')
    .bind('formUpdated.summary', function () {
      self.trigger('summaryUpdated');
    })
    // The actual summaryUpdated handler doesn't fire when the callback is
    // changed, so we have to do this manually.
    .trigger('summaryUpdated');
};

/**
 * Sends a 'formUpdated' event each time a form element is modified.
 */
Drupal.behaviors.formUpdated = {
  attach: function (context) {
    // These events are namespaced so that we can remove them later.
    var events = 'change.formUpdated click.formUpdated blur.formUpdated keyup.formUpdated';
    $(context)
      // Since context could be an input element itself, it's added back to
      // the jQuery object and filtered again.
      .find(':input').andSelf().filter(':input')
      // To prevent duplicate events, the handlers are first removed and then
      // (re-)added.
      .unbind(events).bind(events, function () {
        $(this).trigger('formUpdated');
      });
  }
};

/**
 * Prepopulate form fields with information from the visitor cookie.
 */
Drupal.behaviors.fillUserInfoFromCookie = {
  attach: function (context, settings) {
    $('form.user-info-from-cookie').once('user-info-from-cookie', function () {
      var formContext = this;
      $.each(['name', 'mail', 'homepage'], function () {
        var $element = $('[name=' + this + ']', formContext);
        var cookie = $.cookie('Drupal.visitor.' + this);
        if ($element.length && cookie) {
          $element.val(cookie);
        }
      });
    });
  }
};

})(jQuery);
#### City of Buffalo, Appellant, v. Whitmier and Filbrick Company, Respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs, on the authority of *City of Buffalo*v. *Cusack Co.*(143 App. Div. 957), decided March 8, 1911. Held, that the ordinance in question does not apply to billboards erected prior to the passage of the ordinance.

All concurred; McLennan, P. J., on the further ground that there is no evidence tending to prove that the billboards in question were a common nuisance.
# Supreme Court of Florida

____________ No. SC17

- 1179

____________ ANTHONY LAMARCA, Appellant,

vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. [January 30, 2018]

PER CURIAM.
We have for review Anthony Lam arca’s appeal of the circuit court’s order denying Lam arca’s motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851. This Court has jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const.
Lam arca’s motion sought relief pursuant to the United States Supreme
Court’s decision in Hurst v. Florida , 136 S. Ct. 616 (2016), and our decision on
remand in Hurst v. State ( Hurst ), 202 So. 3d 40 (Fla. 2016), cert. denied , 137 S. Ct. 2161 (2017). This Court stayed Lam arca’s appeal p ending the disposition of
Hitchcock v. State , 226 So. 3d 216 (Fla. 2017) , cert. denied , 138 S. Ct. 513 (2017)

.- 2

-

After this Court decided Hitchcock , Lam arca responded to this Court’s order to show cause arguing why Hitchcock should not be dispositive in thi s case. After reviewing Lam arca’s response to the order to show cause, as well as the State’s arguments in reply, we conclude that Lam arca is not entitled to relief.
Lam arca was sentenced to death following a jury’s recommend ation for death by a
vote of eleven to one

. LaMarca v. State , 785 So. 2d 1209 , 1211 (Fla. 2001 ).
Lam arca’s senten ce of death became final in 2001

. LaMarca v. Florida , 534 U.S. 925 (2001 ). Thus, Hurst does not apply retroactively to Lam arca’s sentence of
death. See Hitchcock , 226 So. 3d at 217. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of
Lam arca’s motion. The Court having carefully considered all arguments raised by Lamarca , we caution that any rehearing motion containing reargument will be stricken. It is so
ordered. LABARGA, C.J., and QUINCE, POLSTON, and LAWSON, JJ., concur. PARIENTE, J., concurs in result with an opinion. LEWIS and CANADY, JJ., concur in result. PARIENTE, J., concurring in result. I concur in result because I recognize that this Court’s opinion in Hitchcock
v. State , 226 So. 3d 216 (Fla. 2017), cert. denied , 138 S. Ct. 513 (2017), is now final. However, I continue to adhere to the views expressed in my dissenting opinion in Hitchcock

.- 3

-

An Appeal from the Circuit Court in and for Pinellas County, Nancy Moate Ley , Judg e
- Case No. 52199502070XXXXNO Linda McDermott of McClain & McDermott, P.A., Estero , Florida; James Vincent Viggiano, Jr., Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, and Ali A. Shakoor, Assistant Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, Middle Region, Temple Terrace, Florida, for Appellant Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, and Scott A. Browne , Senior Assistant Attorney General, Tampa , Florida, for Appellee
#### In the Matter of Hieronimus A. Herold, an Attorney.

Proceedings dismissed. Order to be settled on notice.