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

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 650 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 650

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                       October 8, 2009.
Whereas country music was created in the United States and its distinctive sound 
        makes it a uniquely American institution;
Whereas country music is rooted in the folk traditions of the British Isles;
Whereas in the United States, those roots became entangled with the ethnic music 
        of immigrants from other regions and African slaves to create a uniquely 
        American sound;
Whereas in 1922, a country music performance was broadcast on the radio for the 
        first time, and the earliest commercial recording of country music was 
        made, featuring the song ``Sallie Gooden'', performed by fiddlist A.C. 
        ``Eck'' Robertson;
Whereas throughout the 1920s, the earliest country music records and radio 
        programs brought the music out of the rural heartland and into homes 
        across the United States;
Whereas no institution is more closely associated with country music than WSM 
        Radio's Grand Ole Opry in Nashville, Tennessee, which, since 1925, has 
        introduced the United States to many of the great talents of country 
        music through live Saturday night performances;
Whereas two of the top selling solo artists of all time, Elvis Presley and Garth 
        Brooks, are rooted in country music;
Whereas Garth Brooks, with 128,000,000 records sold, is the top selling solo 
        artist in United States history;
Whereas top country musician Willie Nelson said that country music is where 
        ``people tell their life stories''; and
Whereas country music continues to increase in popularity in the United States 
        and around the world: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) declares country music to be a uniquely American art form; and
            (2) recognizes that country music should be honored for its 
        contributions to American life and culture.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. 

Wniteb ~tate~ ([ourt of ~peal~ 

for tbe jf eberal ([ircuit 

IN RE GERALD M. BENSON AND KENNETH L. 

SMITH 

2011-1311 

(Serial No. 11/061,327) 

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office, Board of Patent Appeals and Interferem::es. 

IN RE GERALD M. BENSON AND KENNETH L. 

SMITH 

2011-1312 

(Serial No. 09/515,978) 

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office, Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences. 

ON MOTION 

ORDER 
INREBENSON 2 

The appellants move without opposition to consolidate 

these two cases for briefing and oral argument. 

Because separate opening briefs were filed by the 

appellants, we deem the better course is to treat the cases 

as compamon cases. 

Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED THAT: 

The motion to consolidate is denied. The cases will be 

treated as companion cases, i.e., they will be argued 

consecutively before the same merits panel. 

,Rll 2 9 2011 

Date 

cc: Sandra K. Nowak, Esq. 

Raymond T. Chen, Esq. 

s20 

FOR THE COURT 

/s/ Jan Horbaly 

Jan Horbaly 

Clerk 

FILED 

U. COURT OF APPEALS FOR 

THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT 

JUL 292011 

JANHORBALY 

ClERK
1 WO 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

1 O United States of America, No. CR-17-08278-001-PCT-DJH 

11 Plaintiff, ORDER 

12 v. 

13 Richard Roland Draper, Jr., 

14 Defendant. 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

Defendant appeared in court with counsel. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3141 et. seq. a 

detention hearing was held. The defendant is ordered detained pending an intake 

assessment for placement at Crossroads in Ph9enix, Arizona or other facility as 

designated by Pretrial Services. Should defendant qualify for such placement, defendant 

shall be released upon conditions set by this Court, including pretrial residency at said 

facility, as conditions do exist which would reasonably assure the safety of others and the 

appearance of the defendant. Should defendant not so qualify, the release conditions set 

by this Court shall be vacated and defendant shall be detained pending trial as there are 

no conditions or combination of conditions which would reasonably assure the safety of 

others or the appearance of the defendant. 

The Pretrial Services Officer is ordered to timely notify this Court of the 

defendant's intake assessment results, and if found acceptable, the date and time the 

II 
.})'i. '.j ,, 

1 facility will provide transportation from the Sandra Day O'Connor Courthouse for the 

2 defendant. 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

Dated this 28th day ofNovember, 2017. 

/F 16 ../ 

f _, .. / 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

.P; 25 

26 

27 

28 

- 2 -
Exhibit
32.1




CERTIFICATION
OF


CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER AND


CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350




In
connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Aspire Japan,
Inc., for the quarter ending April 30, 2008, I, Ken Osako, Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Aspire Japan, Inc. hereby certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief,
that:




1. Such
quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending April 30, 2008,
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 such quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended April 30, 2008, fairly represents in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of Aspire Japan, Inc.




Dated:  
      June 16, 2008






Aspire
Japan, Inc.




By:
            /s/
      Ken Osako
              Chief
      Executive Officer
              Chief
      Financial Officer
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 16-4428

___________________________

Samuel Bryce Silk, Jr.

lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner - Appellant

v.

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent - Appellee

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the District of North Dakota - Bismarck

____________

 Submitted: February 22, 2018

Filed: February 23, 2018

[Unpublished]

____________

Before GRUENDER, MURPHY, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Samuel Bryce Silk, Jr. appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for relief

under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 after it sua sponte enforced a collateral review waiver in his

plea agreement. Silk’s motion raises one claim: that he could not, as a matter of law,

have committed the crime to which he pleaded guilty, domestic assault as a habitual

offender, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 117.
Upon de novo review, we conclude that the collateral review waiver is

unenforceable because, during the plea hearing, the district court neither informed

Silk of the terms of the waiver, nor determined that he understood its terms. See Fed.

R. Crim. P. 11(b)(1)(N); United States v. Boneshirt, 662 F.3d 509, 516 (8th Cir.

2011). We therefore vacate the denial of Silk’s § 2255 motion, and remand the case

to the district court for further consideration. We leave for the district court to

determine in the first instance: (1) whether any other procedural hurdles preclude

consideration of Silk’s claim on the merits; and (2) if not, whether Silk had at least

two prior qualifying convictions that were “final” on July 12, 2014, when the events

underlying this case occurred. See 18 U.S.C. § 117(a)(1) (requiring, as relevant, that

a defendant’s prior convictions be both “final” and “against a spouse or intimate

partner”); see also United States v. Wroblewski, 816 F.3d 1021, 1024–25 (8th Cir.

2016); United States v. Frook, 616 F.3d 773, 774–76 (8th Cir. 2006). Finally, we

note that Silk attacks the validity of his conviction, and his currently scheduled

release date is May 11, 2018. We are confident the district court will act

expeditiously.

Mandate to issue forthwith.

______________________________

-2-
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-1886

KAREN DISHMAN POWELL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

ST. PAUL POLICE DEPARTMENT; ALLEN PORTER;

GEORGE ROBINSON,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Big Stone Gap. Glen M. Williams, Senior

District Judge. (CA-01-27-2)

Submitted: October 24, 2002 Decided: October 30, 2002

Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Karen Dishman Powell, Appellant Pro Se. Eric Roger Thiessen, PENN,

STUART & ESKRIDGE, Abingdon, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Karen Dishman Powell appeals the district court’s order

denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have

reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the

district court. Powell v. St. Paul Police Dep’t, No. CA-01-27-2

(W.D. Va. July 23, 2002). 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
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATIONS OF CEO AND CFO PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. § 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


§ 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Kandi Technologies, Corp. (the “Company”) for the quarterly period ending September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Hu Xiaoming, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Zhu Xiaoying, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge, that:





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





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





/s/ Hu XiaomingName:
Hu XiaomingTitle:
President and Chief Executive OfficerDate:
July 29, 2011/s/ Zhu XiaoyingName:
Zhu XiaoyingTitle:
Chief Financial OfficerDate:
July 29, 2011
**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

 

 

Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, in his capacity as an officer of Omega Flex, Inc. (the “Company”), that, to his knowledge: 

 

 (a)     the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and 

 

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

 

Dated: March 31, 2007

 

/s/  Kevin R. Hoben______________________

 

Kevin R. Hoben

Chief Executive Officer 

 

/s/  E. Lynn Wilkinson_____________________

 

E. Lynn Wilkinson

Chief Financial Officer 

 

This certification is not deemed to be “filed” for purposes of section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section.  This certification is not deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.

 

 

|   | Page 1 |
|--------|--------|
# **Exhibit 32.2**

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

I, John A. Roberts, the Chief FinancialOfficer of InfoLogix, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

·                  the Form 10-Q of the Company for the three months ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Form 10-Q”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

·                  the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated:  May 15,2007

| /s/ John A. Roberts     |   |   |
|-------------------------|--------|--------|
| John A. Roberts         |   |
| Chief Financial Officer |   |

 

----
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Vinson R. SMALLS, Appellant.

No. WD 50934.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Dec. 3, 1996.

James C. Cox, Assistant Appellate Defender, Kansas City for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General, Jill C. LaHue, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before ULRICH, C.J., P.J., and HANNA and SPINDEN, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Vinson Smalls appeals his conviction following a jury trial for first degree robbery, section 558.011.1, RSMo 1994, and sentence of fifteen years imprisonment. He also appeals the dismissal, with prejudice, of his Rule 29.15 motion for postconviction relief.

The judgment of conviction and the dismissal with prejudice of the postconviction motion are affirmed. Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).
**Exhibit99.1**

 

U S Liquids Inc.

411 N. Sam Houston Parkway E., Suite 400

Houston, Texas 77060

(281) 272-4500

 

 

March 28, 2002

 

Securities and ExchangeCommission

450 Fifth Street N.W.

Washington, DC 20549

 

Ladies and Gentlemen:

 

Wehave received, on the date hereof, representation from Arthur Andersen LLP thattheir audit of the financial statements contained in U S Liquids Inc.’s AnnualReport on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001, of which thisExhibit 99.1 is a part, was subject to their quality control system for theU.S. accounting and auditing practice to provide reasonable assurance that theengagement was conducted in compliance with professional standards, and thatthere was appropriate continuity of Arthur Andersen personnel working on theaudit and availability of national office consultation to conduct the relevantportions of the audit.

 
|   | Very  truly yours,       |
|--------|--------------------------|
|   |                     |
|   | U S  LIQUIDS INC.        |
|   |                     |
|   | /s/  Earl J. Blackwell   |
|   |                     |
|   | Earl  J. Blackwell       |
|   | Chief  Financial Officer |
|   |                     |

 

 

----
EXHIBIT 32
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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 Registrant.
 Dated: August 7, 2008/s/ Joseph L. WelchJoseph L. WelchPresident and Chief Executive Officer/s/ Edward M. RahillEdward M. RahillSenior Vice President  Finance andChief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER OF

UNIVERSAL CITY FLORIDA HOLDING CO. I

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the quarterly report of Universal City Florida Holding Co. I (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending April 1, 2007 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), I, Tracey L. Stockwell, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



| | (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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: May 11, 2007



By:

/s/ TRACEY L. STOCKWELLTracey L. Stockwell Principal Financial Officer




31
EXHIBIT 31.2


CERTIFICATIONS
OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


UNDER
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT





I, H.
MacGregor Clarke, certify that:





1. I have
reviewed this report on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2009 of
AeroGrow International Inc.;





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;





3. Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and
for, the periods presented in this report;





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





(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;





(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and





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





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





(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and





(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over
financial reporting.





Date:  February
      17, 2010
            By:
            /s/ H. MacGregor
      ClarkeH.
      MacGregor ClarkeChief
      Financial Officer
              (Principal
      Financial Officer)
#### John and Ellen WILLIAMS, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. John K. PRUELLAGE, Defendant/Respondent.

No. 69113.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.

May 21, 1996.

Richard B. Dempsey, Dempsey, Nangle, Cooper, Niemann & Biting, Washington, for appellants.

Henry D. Menghini, Evans & Dixon, St. Louis, for respondent.

Before GERALD M. SMITH, P.J., and GARY M. GAERTNER and RHODES RUSSELL, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiffs/appellants, John and Ellen Williams, appeal the judgment of the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis finding their legal malpractice action barred by the statute of limitations and entering summary judgment in favor of defendant/respondent, John K. Pruellage. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the legal file and find no error. As an extended opinion would serve no jurispru*438dential purpose, we affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
1 WO 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8' 

9 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

1 O United States of America, No. CR-17-08312-001-PCT-JJT 

11 Plaintiff, ORDER 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

Sanjay Nelson, 

Defendant. 

Defendant appeared in court with counsel. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3141 et. seq. a 

detention hearing was held. The defendant is ordered detained pending an intake 

assessment· for placement at Crossroads in Phoenix, Arizona or other facility as 

designated by Pretrial Services. Should defendant qualify for such placement, defendant 

shall be released upon conditions set by this Court, including pretrial residency at said 

facility, as conditions do exist which would reasonably assure the safety of others and the 

appearance of the defendar,it. Should defendant not so qualify, the release conditions set 

by this Court shall be vacated and defendarit shall be detained pen:ding trial as there are 

no conditions or combination of conditions which would reasonably assure·the safety of 

others or the appearance of the defendant. 

The Pretrial Services Officer is ordered to timely notify this Court of the 

defendant's intake assessment results, and if found acceptable; the date and time the 

II 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

facility will provide transportation from the Sandra Day O'Connor Courthouse for the 

defendant. 

Dated this 31st day of January, 2018. 

- 2 -