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

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 45

To apply the antitrust laws of the United States to major league baseball.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 4, 1995

Mr. CONYERS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To apply the antitrust laws of the United States to major

league baseball.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Baseball Fans and

5 Communities Protection Act of 1995’’.

6 SEC. 2. APPLICATION OF THE ANTITRUST LAWS TO MAJOR

7 LEAGUE BASEBALL IN EXCEPTIONAL AND EX8 TRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES.

9 The Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 12 et seq.) is amended

10 by adding at the end the following:
2

•HR 45 IH

1 ‘‘SEC. 27. (a) If unilateral terms and conditions of

2 employment in restraint of trade or commerce are imposed

3 by any party that has been subject to an agreement be4 tween 2 or more major league baseball clubs and the labor

5 organization representing the players of major league

6 baseball, such unilateral imposition shall be subject to the

7 antitrust laws.

8 ‘‘(b) Subsection (a) shall not apply to a term or con9 dition imposed solely with respect to a professional base10 ball player who is a party to a uniform player contract

11 that is assigned, at the time the imposition described in

12 such subsection occurs, to a baseball club that is not a

13 major league professional baseball club.

14 ‘‘(c) This section shall not be construed to modify,

15 impair, or supersede the operation of—

16 ‘‘(1) the Act of September 30, 1961 (Public

17 Law 87–331; 15 U.S.C. 1291 et seq.), or

18 ‘‘(2) any Federal statute relating to labor rela19 tions.

20 ‘‘(d) For purposes of this section, the term ‘terms

21 and conditions’ does not include a strike or a lockout.’’.

Æ
#### People of the State of Illinois, Appellee, v. Willie Clark, et al., Appellants.

Gen. Nos. 50,628 and 50,629.

First District, Second Division.

December 20, 1966.

Gerald W. Getty, Public Defender of Cook County, of Chicago (Marshall J. Hartman and James J. Doherty, Assistant Public Defenders, of counsel), for appellants; Daniel P. Ward, State’s Attorney of Cook County, of Chicago (Elmer C. Kissane and Truman Larrey, Assistant State’s Attorneys, of counsel), for appellee.

Opinion by

PRESIDING JUSTICE BRYANT.

Not to be published in full.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                              NOV-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1999
<CASH>                                           3,665
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   82,174
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     42,243
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               140,486
<PP&E>                                         220,307
<DEPRECIATION>                                  73,184
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 362,062
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           85,449
<BONDS>                                        134,036
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           109
<OTHER-SE>                                     111,054
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   362,062
<SALES>                                        443,797
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               443,797
<CGS>                                          371,284
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  371,284
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                44,212
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,810
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 20,491
<INCOME-TAX>                                     8,590
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             11,901
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    11,901
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.17


</TABLE>
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 1 7

- 1211

_____________________________
N ATHANIEL J. B ROWN , Appellant,

v.

P AMELA J O B ONDI , Attorney General of Florida
, Appellee.

___________________________ On app eal from the Circuit Court for Leon County

. James O. Shelfer , Judge

.

April 20, 2018

P ER C URIAM

. Appellant has filed myriad actions in this Court and others attacking his 2005 judgment and sentence entered in Duval County

. See Brown v. State
, 229 So. 3 d 397 (Mem.) (Fla. 1st DCA 2017)

. This appeal is the la test in that collection , and like the rest , it is frivolous

. In 2010, w e barred Appellant from “filing any future [pro se] appeals, petitions, motions, pleadings or other filings” challenging his conv iction
, in part because “those filings ha[ve] consumed an inordinate amount of our limited judicial resources.” Brown v. State , 35 So. 3d 72, 73 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)

.2 Apparently unfazed by our warnings, Appellant continued filing
pro se actions in this Cour t challenging that conviction

. E.g.
, Brown v. Tucker , 75 So. 3d 393, 394 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011). In 2017, this Court broadened Appellant’s bar to include any further filings, unless they are signed by a member in good standing with The Florida Bar after rejec ting Appellant’s argument that his civil litigation should be considered separate from his criminal litigation when considering sanctions

. Brown v. State , 221 So. 3d 1284 , 1284 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017). After barring Appellant twice, we also warned him that fut ure “ violation of this order could result in referral to the Department of Corrections for sanctions under section 944.279, Florida Statutes. ” Brown , 221 So. 3d at 1284

– 85.
That brings us to Appellant’s current appeal. First, we dismiss the appeal because Appellant is barred from filing any pro se actions in this Court. Second, all pending motions are stricken as unauthorized. But because Appellant has yet to heed our warnings to stop filing frivolous actions, we also direct a certified copy of this opinio n be provided to the Department of Corrections to be forwarded to the appropriate institution or facility for disciplinary procedures pursuant to section 944.279, Florida Statutes.

F inally, we note that Appellant is still barred from filing any document w ith this Court that is not signed by a member in good standing of The Florida Bar, and the Clerk of this Court is directed to reject any further filings by Appellant not signed by a member in good standing with The Florida Bar. This includes any post

- dispo sition motion filed in this case.

W ETHERELL , M AKAR , and K ELSEY , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

. Any such motion must be signed by a member in good standing of The Florida Bar.

_____________________________3 Nathaniel J. Brown, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General and Charles J. F. Schreiber, Jr., Senior Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Exhibit 21.1

                                 State of
 Name of Subsidiary            Incorporation          Doing Business As (Name)
_______________________________________________________________________________

PHC, Inc.                      Massachusetts          Pioneer Behavioral Health
                                                      PDSS
                                                      Pioneer Recovery Systems

PHC of Utah, Inc.              Massachusetts          Highland Ridge Hospital
                                                      Wellplace

PHC of Virginia, Inc.          Massachusetts          Mount Regis Center
                                                      Changes

PHC of Michigan, Inc.          Massachusetts          Harbor Oaks Hospital
                                                      Pioneer Healthcare of
                                                       Michigan
                                                      Wellplace Call Center
                                                      Detroit Behavioral
                                                       Institute
                                                      Harbor Oaks Hospital
                                                       Outpatient Services
                                                      Pioneer Behavioral Health

PHC of Nevada, Inc.            Massachusetts          Harmony Healthcare

North Point-Pioneer, Inc.      Massachusetts          Pioneer Counseling Center
                                                      Pioneer Healthcare of
                                                        Michigan
                                                      Pioneer Pharmaceutical
                                                        Research
                                                      Pioneer Health Centers

BSC-NY, Inc.                   New York               Behavioral Stress Center

Professional Health
  Associates, Inc.             New York               N/A

Behavioral Health Online       Massachusetts          BehavioralHealthOnLine.com
                                                      Wellplace

Detroit Behavioral
  Institute, Inc.              Massachusetts          N/A

Wellplace, Inc.                Massachusetts          N/A

Pivotal Research Centers,
  Inc.                         Delaware               Pivotal Research Centers
                                                      Pivotal Research Centers,
                                                       LLC

Seven Hills Hospital, Inc.     Delaware               N/A


                                    -- 81 --
<PAGE>
**Exhibit 32**

 

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

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 of Mondo Acquisition I, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jeffrey J. Fessler, President of the Company, certify, 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. |
|-----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

 

||
||
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 102 

To repeal the provision of law that provides automatic pay adjustments 

for Members of Congress. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 6, 2009 

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

to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To repeal the provision of law that provides automatic pay 

adjustments for Members of Congress. 

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

3 SECTION 1. ELIMINATION OF AUTOMATIC PAY ADJUST4 MENTS FOR MEMBERS OF CONGRESS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (2) of section 601(a) 

6 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (2 U.S.C. 

7 31) is repealed. 

8 (b) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— 

9 Section 601(a)(1) of such Act is amended— 

10 (1) by striking ‘‘(a)(1)’’ and inserting ‘‘(a)’’; 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2 

•S 102 IS

1 (2) by redesignating subparagraphs (A), (B), 

2 and (C) as paragraphs (1), (2), and (3), respectively; 

3 and 

4 (3) by striking ‘‘as adjusted by paragraph (2) 

5 of this subsection’’ and inserting ‘‘adjusted as pro6 vided by law’’. 

7 SEC. 2. ROLL CALL VOTE IN THE SENATE ON PAY ADJUST8 MENTS FOR MEMBERS OF CONGRESS. 

9 (a) IN GENERAL.—It shall not be in order in the Sen10 ate to consider a bill, amendment, resolution, or con11 ference report containing any provision that adjusts the 

12 pay of Members of Congress, unless that provision has 

13 been subject to a roll call vote in the Senate. 

14 (b) SUPERMAJORITY WAIVER AND APPEAL.—This 

15 section may be waived or suspended in the Senate only 

by an affirmative vote of 3 16 ⁄5 of the Members, duly chosen 

and sworn. An affirmative vote of 3 17 ⁄5 of the Members of 

18 the Senate, duly chosen and sworn, shall be required in 

19 the Senate to sustain an appeal of the ruling of the Chair 

20 on a point of order raised under this section. 

21 (c) RULEMAKING POWER OF THE SENATE.—This 

22 section is enacted by Congress— 

23 (1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of 

24 the Senate and as such it is deemed a part of the 

25 rules of the Senate, but applicable only with respect 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
3 

•S 102 IS

1 to the procedure to be followed in the Senate in the 

2 case of a provision described under subsection (a), 

3 and it supersedes other rules only to the extent that 

4 it is inconsistent with such rules; and 

5 (2) with full recognition of the constitutional 

6 right of the Senate to change the rules (so far as re7 lating to the procedure of the Senate) at any time, 

8 in the same manner, and to the same extent as in 

9 the case of any other rule of the Senate. 

10 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

11 This Act shall take effect on February 1, 2011. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Timothy William O'HARA, Appellant. Timothy William O'HARA, Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

Nos. 66362, 69046.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District. Division Three.

Sept. 17, 1996.

Robert E. Steele, Jr., Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General and David R. Truman, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, for respondent.

*902Before CRAHAN, P.J., and GRIMM and HOFF, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, Timothy William O’Hara, appeals the judgment entered upon his convictions by a jury of involuntary manslaughter, § 565.024 RSMo 1986, and armed criminal action, § 571.015 RSMo 1986. Defendant was sentenced to seven years for involuntary manslaughter consecutive to life imprisonment for armed criminal action.

The judgment is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential or jurisprudential value. Judgment affirmed in accordance with Rule 30.25(b).

Defendant also appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion after an evidentiary hearing. However, defendant fails to raise any points on appeal relating to the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion. Where a defendant appeals the denial of a Rule 29.15 motion, but fails to raise any points related to the denial of that motion in the brief on appeal, the point is considered abandoned. *State v. Link,*916 S.W.2d 385, 386 n. 1 (Mo.App.1996); *State v. Nelson,*818 S.W.2d 285, 287 (Mo.App.1991).
Exhibit 4.3


Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm


We consent to the
reference made to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Part B of the Prospectus
and to the use of our report dated April 23, 2014, in this Registration Statement (Form S-6 No. 333-194534) of Smart
Trust, Zacks GARP Composite 35 Trust, Series 1.


 


/s/ Grant
Thornton LLP


Grant
Thornton LLP


Chicago, Illinois


April 23, 2014
EXHIBIT 32.1


STATEMENT OF MANAGING DIRECTOR
 PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350 OF TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE


Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code, the undersigned, Alan Schaffner, Managing Director of Biofuels Power Corporation (the “Company”), hereby certifies that:
 
 The Company’s Form 10-Q/A Report for the three months ended March 31, 2013 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 /s/ Alan Schaffner
 Alan Schaffner, Managing Director
 Dated: December 30, 2013
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>         5
<MULTIPLIER>      1,000

<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                     YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                                  25
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        7,392
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     7,417
<PP&E>                                              43,870
<DEPRECIATION>                                      24,835
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      26,452
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                3,770
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                          22,682
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        26,452
<SALES>                                             18,986
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    20,240
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        2,954
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     6,390
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     10,896
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      0
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                        10,896
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                          .50
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          .50



</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND

CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Each of Ashraf M. Dahod and Paul J. Milbury hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in his capacity as
President and Chief Executive Officer and Vice President, Operations and Chief Financial Officer, respectively of Starent Networks, Corp. (the Company), that, to his knowledge, the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for
the period ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                       |  |     |  |                                                       
|---------------------- |  | --- |  | ------------------------------------------------------
|Date: November 6, 2009 |  | By: |  | /S/ ASHRAF M. DAHOD                                   
|                       |  |     |  | Ashraf M. Dahod                                       
|                       |  |     |  | President and Chief Executive Officer                 
|                       |  |    
|Date: November 6, 2009 |  | By: |  | /S/PAUL J. MILBURY                                    
|                       |  |     |  | Paul J. Milbury                                       
|                       |  |     |  | Vice President, Operations and Chief Financial Officer
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 527

To amend the Tariff Act of 1930 to permit an extension for filing drawback

claims in cases where the President has declared a major disaster.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 17, 1995

Mr. BERMAN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Tariff Act of 1930 to permit an extension

for filing drawback claims in cases where the President

has declared a major disaster.

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

3 SECTION 1. SPECIAL RULE FOR EXTENDING TIME FOR FIL4 ING DRAWBACK CLAIMS.

5 Section 313(r) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C.

6 1313(r)), is amended by adding at the end the following:

7 ‘‘(3)(A) Notwithstanding the limitation set

8 forth in paragraph (1), the Customs Service may ex9 tend the time for filing a drawback claim for a pe10 riod not to exceed 18 months, if—
2

HR 527 IH

1 ‘‘(i) the claimant establishes to the satis2 faction of the Customs Service that the claim3 ant was unable to file the drawback claim be4 cause of an event declared by the President to

5 be a major disaster on or after January 1,

6 1994; and

7 ‘‘(ii) the claimant files a request for such

8 extension with the Customs Service within 1

9 year from the last day of the 3-year period re10 ferred to in paragraph (1).

11 ‘‘(B) If an extension is granted with respect to

12 a request filed under this paragraph, the periods of

13 time for retaining records set forth in subsection (t)

14 of this section and section 508(c)(3) shall be ex15 tended for an additional 18 months.

16 ‘‘(C) For purposes of this paragraph the term

17 ‘major disaster’ has the meaning given such term in

18 section 102(2) of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster

19 Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C.

20 5122(2)).’’.

Æ
#### Albert Gaffey, Appellant, v. Gates Thalheimer, Respondent.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. All concurred.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

DARON HARRELL,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D2024-0385

[July 3, 2024]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Cymonie S. Rowe, 

Judge; L.T. Case No. 502018CF004352XXXXMB.

Daron Harrell, Indiantown, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

KLINGENSMITH, C.J., GERBER and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.