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

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 76 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 H. R. 76

    To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide a 1-year 
   extension of the deduction for the health insurance costs of self-
                         employed individuals.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 1995

   Mr. Barrett of Wisconsin 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 provide a 1-year 
   extension of the deduction for the health insurance costs of self-
                         employed individuals.

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

SECTION 1. 1-YEAR EXTENSION OF DEDUCTION FOR HEALTH INSURANCE COSTS OF 
              SELF-EMPLOYED INDIVIDUALS.

    (a) In General.--Paragraph (6) of section 162(l) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to special rules for health insurance 
costs of self-employed individuals) is amended by striking ``December 
31, 1993'' and inserting ``December 31, 1995''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1993.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE>



                                                                                                           EXHIBIT 12
                                  PACIFIC BELL
               COMPUTATION OF RATIOS OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                               Dollars in Millions

<CAPTION>


                                               NINE MONTHS ENDED
                                                 SEPTEMBER 30,                  YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
                                              ------------------   ---------------------------------------------------
                                                1997      1996       1996       1995      1994       1993       1992
                                              --------- ---------  ---------------------------------------------------
<S>                                           <C>       <C>        <C>          <C>       <C>       <C>        <C>
Income (Loss) From Continuing Operations Before
   Income Taxes, Extraordinary Loss and
   Cumulative Effect of Accounting Changes    $   (74)  $ 1,491    $ 1,945   $  1,538   $ 1,692    $   (39)  $  1,738
     Add:  Interest Expense                       336       277        363        410       439        429        460
          1/3 Rental Expense                       52        37         46         28        40         37         35
                                              --------- ---------  --------  ---------  --------   --------  ---------
     Adjusted Earnings                        $   314   $ 1,805    $ 2,354   $  1,976   $ 2,171    $   427   $  2,233
                                              ========= =========  ========  =========  ========   ========  =========

Total Interest Charges                        $   373   $   306    $   411   $    410   $   439    $   429   $    460
1/3 Rental Expense                                 52        37         46         28        40         37         35
                                              --------- ---------  --------  ---------  --------   --------  ---------

     Adjusted Fixed Charges                   $   425   $   343    $    457  $    438   $   479    $   466   $     495
                                              ========= =========  ========= =========  ========   ========  =========

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges               0.74       5.26       5.15      4.51      4.53        0.92      4.51





</TABLE>
Exhibit
32.2





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 Neuralstem, Inc. (the “Company”) Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John Conron, Chief Financial
Officer 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, to the best of
my knowledge:





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





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





Date:
March 30, 2010





/s/ John ConronJohn
      ConronChief
      Financial Officer(Principal
      Accounting Officer)
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 12.1
                                        

                          JOHN Q. HAMMONS HOTELS, L.P
                 HISTORICAL RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                                (000's omitted)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                     
                                         1994       1995       1996       1997       1998
                                         ----       ----       ----       ----       ---- 
<S>                                     <C>        <C>        <C>        <C>        <C>
HISTORICAL EARNINGS:
Net income before extraordinary item    $15,386    $18,729    $18,524    $ 8,791    $   338
                                                  
Add:
Interest, amortization or deferred
financing fees and other fixed
charges (excluding interest                                                                                       
capitalized)                             33,308     28,904     36,337     45,086     58,257
                                        -------    -------    -------    -------    -------
   Historical earnings                  $48,694    $47,633    $54,861    $53,877    $58,595
                                        =======    =======    =======    =======    =======

FIXED CHARGES:
Interest expense and
 amortization of deferred
 financing fees                         $32,932    $28,447    $35,620    $44,325    $57,286
         
Interest capitalized                        957      5,270      7,162     10,259      6,163
                                                      
Interest element of rentals                 376        457        717        761        971
                                        -------    -------    -------    -------    -------

   Fixed charges                        $34,265    $34,174    $43,499    $55,345    $64,420
                                        -------    -------    -------    -------    -------

RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES (A)     1.42       1.39       1.26       0.97       0.91
                                        =======    =======    =======    =======    =======
</TABLE>

(A) In computing the ratio of earnings to fixed charges, earnings have been
    based on income from operations before income taxes and fixed charges
    (exclusive of interest capitalized) and fixed charges consist of interest
    and amortization of deferred financing fees (including amounts capitalized)
    and the estimated interest portion of rents (deemed to be one-third of
    rental expense).
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

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

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 certifies that this periodic
report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
contained in this quarterly report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Spartech
Corporation.

                                        Date: September 8, 2005

                                        /s/ GEORGE A. ABD
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        George A. Abd
                                        President and Chief Executive Officer

                                        /s/ RANDY C. MARTIN
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Randy C. Martin
                                        Executive Vice President - Corporate
                                        Development and Chief Financial Officer


                                       38
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-08-00384-CV

AMERICAN HOUSING FOUNDATION 

AND COLLEGE STATION TEXAS 

SOUTHGATE VILLAGE, LTD.,

Appellants

v.

BRAZOS COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT,

Appellee

From the 361st District Court

Brazos County, Texas

Trial Court No. 06-002010-CV-361

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellants American Housing Foundation and College Station Texas Southgate 

Village, Ltd. appealed the trial court’s judgment rendered against them. Appellants 

now file a motion to dismiss their appeal stating that they no longer wished to pursue 

the appeal. The certificate of conference states that appellee is unopposed to the 

motion.

Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1).

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice
American Housing Foundation v. Brazos County Appraisal District Page 2

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Reyna, and

Justice Davis

Appeal dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed February 11, 2009

[CV06]
#### UNITED STATES, Plaintiff, Appellee, v. TWENTY ONE ITEMS VALUED AT $24,663.12; Tag No. BFX 264; Tag No. BDS 136, Defendants, Alfonso Cardona-Arredondo, Claimant, Appellant.

No. 01-2734.

United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit.

Nov. 7, 2002.

Alfonso Cardona Arredondo, on brief pro se.

Guillermo Gil, United States Attorney, and Jose Javier Santos Mimoso, Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.

Before BOUDIN, Chief Judge, TORRUELLA and HOWARD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

As the government argues, claimant’s attempt to recover interest on funds and property which the government had seized when claimant was arrested but which were ultimately returned to him is barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity as explained in a decision issued during the pendency of this appeal. *Larson v. United States,*274 F.3d 643 (1st Cir.2001); *see also*28 U.S.C. § 2465. The version of the statute in effect when this proceeding was commenced did not permit an award of any interest. *Id.*at 647. Although a new version of the statute now provides for the recovery of interest, the new version applies prospectively only. *Id.*

Claimant’s argument that we previously mandated an award of interest to him when we remanded the matter to the district court is based on a misapprehension of the remand order (which permitted the district court to explore anew the question of interest) and a misunderstanding of the doctrine of sovereign immunity. Since sovereign immunity deprives the federal court of jurisdiction, it may be raised at any time during the proceedings regardless of prior orders in the case and regardless of a party’s failure to object on that ground. *Id.*at 648.

Claimant’s arguments regarding his motion for the return of an automobile which was not registered in his name, and his attempt to obtain sanctions against the government are frivolous.

The judgment is *affirmed*for the reasons stated above.
#### CRAWFORD v. BULLOCK.

No. 18176.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Orleans.

Feb. 26, 1945.

M. C. Scharff, Henry C. Vosbein, and Robert Pitard, all of New Orleans, for appellants.

A. D. Danziger, of. New Orleans, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff’s counsel, in his brief supporting his application for rehearing, seems much concerned with what he deems to be an attack upon the partnership known as the Toye Bros. Yellow Cab Company and its members. We have reconsidered our opinion and are convinced that there is nothing contained therein which can be construed as a reflection upon the Toye Bros. Yellow Cab Company. What we did say was that the witnesses, who were largely employees of that company, seemed to have the impression that their interests lay in promoting the cause of the plaintiff Crawford. That this is true is clearly shown by the statement which we quoted in our original opinion from the testimony of Fonseca, who, when asked whether he felt it to be his duty to give a statement to the Yellow Cab Company adjuster, said, “Yes, sir, to hold my job, yes, sir.” We intended no criticisfn of Toye Bros. Yellow Cab Company or its members and, as far as we can see, made none.

After a reconsideration we are convinced that our opinion on the merits of the case is correct.

Rehearing refused.
#### In the Matter of Stephen Harvey Siegel (Admitted as Stephen Harvey Bezozo), a Disbarred Attorney.

[678 NYS2d 488]

—Motion for reinstatement as an attorney and counselor-at-law denied. No opinion. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Ellerin, Andrias and Saxe, JJ.
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 800

To amend the conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985

and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to permit the unimpeded

use of privately-owned crop, range, and pasture lands that have been

used for the planting of crops or the grazing of livestock in at least

five of the preceding ten years.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 2, 1995

Mr. HOSTETTLER (for himself, Mr. BAKER of Louisiana, Mr. BOEHNER, Mr.

BRYANT, Mr. BURTON, Mr. CHABOT, Mr. CHAMBLISS, Mrs.

CHENOWETH, Mr. COMBEST, Mr. COOLEY, Mr. EMERSON, Mr. LEWIS of

Kentucky, Mr. MCHUGH, Mr. SMITH of Texas, and Mr. SOUDER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and, in addition, to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in

each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

A BILL

To amend the conservation provisions of the Food Security

Act of 1985 and the Federal Water Pollution Control

Act to permit the unimpeded use of privately-owned crop,

range, and pasture lands that have been used for the

planting of crops or the grazing of livestock in at least

five of the preceding ten years.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 800 IH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Agricultural Lands

3 Protection Act of 1995’’.

4 SEC. 2. EXCLUSION OF HEAVILY USED AGRICULTURAL

5 LANDS FROM DEFINITIONS OF WATERS OF

6 THE UNITED STATES AND NAVIGABLE WA7 TERS UNDER THE FEDERAL WATER POLLU8 TION CONTROL ACT.

9 Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control

10 Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) is amended by adding at the end

11 the following new subsection:

12 ‘‘(t) In addition to the exception provided for prior

13 converted croplands, the terms ‘‘waters of the United

14 States’’ and ‘‘navigable waters’’ in this Act shall not in15 clude any privately-owned crop, range, or pasture lands

16 that have been used for the production of crops or the

17 grazing of livestock in not less than five of the immediately

18 preceding ten calendar years.’’.

19 SEC. 3. EXCLUSION OF HEAVILY USED AGRICULTURAL

20 LANDS FROM SWAMPBUSTER REQUIRE21 MENTS.

22 Section 1222(b)(1) of the Food Security Act of 1985

23 (7 U.S.C. 3822(b)(1)) is amended—

24 (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (B), (C),

25 and (D) as subparagraphs (C), (D), and (E), respec26 tively; and
3

•HR 800 IH

1 (2) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the fol2 lowing new subparagraph:

3 ‘‘(B) in addition to any prior converted

4 croplands under subparagraph (A), any pri5 vately-owned crop, range, or pasture lands that

6 have been used for the production of an agricul7 tural commodity or the grazing of livestock in

8 not less than five of the immediately preceding

9 ten calendar years;’’.

Æ
"SPECIMEN"

              PARADIGM MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.

Number ______                               ____________ Shares
                           Series C Convertible Preferred Stock

                       Incorporated Under
                        the Laws of the
                       State of Delaware



THIS CERTIFIES THAT ___________________________ is the
recordholder of ________________________________________________
(________) fully paid and non-assessable shares of Series C
Convertible Preferred Stock, $.001 par value per share ($100
stated value), of Paradigm Medical Industries, Inc., a Delaware
corporation (herein called the "Corporation"), transferable only
on the share register of the Corporation by the holder hereof in
person, or by duly authorized attorney, upon the surrender of
this certificate properly endorsed or assigned for transfer.

            WITNESS the signatures of the duly authorized
officers of the Corporation.

            DATED:  _____________, 199__



__________________________               ________________________
Michael W. Stelzer, Vice President       Randall A. Mackey, 
of Operations and Chief Operating        Secretary
Officer 

<PAGE>
 
THE CORPORATION IS AUTHORIZED TO ISSUE COMMON STOCK, $0.001 PAR
VALUE, AND PREFERRED STOCK, $0.001 PAR VALUE, WHICH MAY BE ISSUED
IN ONE OR MORE SERIES.  A STATEMENT OF THE RESPECTIVE POWERS,
DESIGNATIONS, PREFERENCES AND RELATIVE, PARTICIPATING, OPTIONAL
OR OTHER SPECIAL RIGHTS OF THE COMMON STOCK AND ANY SUCH SERIES
OF PREFERRED STOCK WILL BE FURNISHED WITHOUT CHARGE TO THE HOLDER
OF RECORD OF THIS CERTIFICATE UPON WRITTEN REQUEST TO THE
SECRETARY OF THE CORPORATION.

FOR VALUE RECEIVED                             HEREBY SELLS,
ASSIGNS, AND TRANSFERS UNTO                                     
                      SHARES REPRESENTED BY THE WITHIN
CERTIFICATE AND DO HEREBY IRREVOCABLY CONSTITUTE AND APPOINT    
                             ATTORNEY TO TRANSFER THE SAID SHARES
ON THE SHARE REGISTER OF THE WITHIN NAMED CORPORATION WITH FULL
POWER TO SUBSTITUTION IN THE PREMISES.

DATED                  , 19  

IN PRESENCE OF                                                  
                               
   (WITNESS)                                         
(SHAREHOLDER)
             
                                                     
(SHAREHOLDER)


NOTICE:  THE SIGNATURE ON THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND WITH
THE NAMES WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THIS CERTIFICATE, IN EVERY
PARTICULAR, WITHOUT ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT, OR ANY CHANGE
WHATSOEVER.

      THE SHARES REPRESENTED BY THIS CERTIFICATE HAVE NOT BEEN
REGISTERED UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933, AS AMENDED (THE
"ACT") OR ANY STATE SECURITIES LAWS IN RELIANCE UPON EXEMPTIONS
FROM REGISTRATION FOR NON-PUBLIC OFFERINGS.  THE SHARES MAY NOT
BE SOLD OR TRANSFERRED UNLESS THE SHARES ARE REGISTERED UNDER THE
ACT AND UNDER APPLICABLE STATE SECURITIES LAWS OR UNLESS THE
COMPANY RECEIVES AN OPINION OF COUNSEL SATISFACTORY TO IT THAT AN
EXEMPTION FROM REGISTRATION IS AVAILABLE.
EXHIBIT
        32.2
 
 **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 Sonic Solutions (the "Company") on Form
        10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and
        Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Paul F. Norris,
        Interim Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the
        date
        hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the
        United
        States Code, that to the best of 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 result of operations of the
                  Company
                  at the dates and for the periods
                  indicated.
  This
        certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, “filed” with the Securities
        and Exchange Commission.
   Date:
        February 25, 2008
   By: /s/
        Paul F. Norris
  Name:
        Paul F. Norris
 Title:
        Executive Vice President and Interim Chief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-7361

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

MICHAEL WALLACE RICE,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior 

District Judge. (3:05-cr-00011-REP-2; 3:08-cv-00403-REP)

Submitted: February 23, 2012 Decided: February 27, 2012

Before MOTZ, DAVIS, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Wallace Rice, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Wu, Assistant 

United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Michael Wallace Rice seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying as untimely his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) 

motion for reconsideration of the district court’s order denying 

relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2011) motion. The 

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues 

a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) 

(2006). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a 

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the district court denies 

relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by 

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the 

district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is 

debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 

(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). 

When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the 

prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural 

ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable 

claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. 

at 484-85. We have independently reviewed the record and 

conclude that Rice has not made the requisite showing. 

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss 

the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts 

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 
3

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

DISMISSED