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

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6359 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6359

To amend the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2021 to improve the semiconductor incentive program 
                     of the Department of Commerce.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 6, 2022

  Ms. Eshoo (for herself and Mr. Kelly of Mississippi) introduced the 
                             following bill

                            January 10, 2022

 Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to 
  the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, 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 William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2021 to improve the semiconductor incentive program 
                     of the Department of Commerce.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Investing in Domestic Semiconductor 
Manufacturing Act''.

SEC. 2. CLARIFICATION FOR UPSTREAM MANUFACTURERS.

    (a) Definitions.--Section 9901(2) of the William M. (Mac) 
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (15 
U.S.C. 4651(2)) is amended--
            (1) by inserting ``production,'' before ``or research and 
        development''; and
            (2) by striking ``of semiconductors.'' and inserting ``of 
        semiconductors, materials used to manufacture semiconductors, 
        or semiconductor manufacturing equipment.''.
    (b) Semiconductor Incentives.--Section 9902(a) of the William M. 
(Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2021 (15 U.S.C. 4652(a)) is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1)--
                    (A) by striking ``for semiconductor fabrication'' 
                and inserting ``for the fabrication'';
                    (B) by inserting ``production,'' before ``or 
                research and development''; and
                    (C) by striking the period at the end and inserting 
                ``of semiconductors, materials used to manufacture 
                semiconductors, or semiconductor manufacturing 
                equipment.''; and
            (2) in paragraph (4)(A), by striking ``used for 
        semiconductors'' and inserting ``used for the purposes''.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 163 (Thursday, August 21, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 49497]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-19380]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 52-022-COL & 52-023-COL]


Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc.; ASLBP No. 08-868-04-COL-BD01; 
Establishment of Atomic Safety and Licensing Board

    Pursuant to delegation by the Commission dated December 29, 1972, 
published in the Federal Register, 37 FR 28,710 (1972), and the 
Commission's regulations, see 10 CFR 2.104, 2.300, 2.303, 2.309, 2.311, 
2.318, and 2.321, notice is hereby given that an Atomic Safety and 
Licensing Board (Board) is being established to preside over the 
following proceeding:

Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc.

(Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Units 2 and 3)

    This proceeding concerns a Petition to Intervene and Request for 
Hearing submitted by the North Carolina Waste Awareness and Reduction 
Network, and a request to participate in any hearing submitted by the 
North Carolina Utilities Commission and the South Carolina Office of 
Regulatory Staff, in response to a June 4, 2008 Notice of Hearing and 
Opportunity To Petition for Leave To Intervene on a Combined License 
Application for the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Units 2 and 3, 
to be located in Wake County, North Carolina (73 FR 31,899). A 
supplemental corrected notice was also published in the Federal 
Register at 73 FR 33,119 (June 11, 2008).
    The Board is comprised of the following administrative judges:

Dr. Paul B. Abramson, Chairman, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 
Panel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001;
Dr. Michael F. Kennedy, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001;
Dr. William E. Kastenberg, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, 
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
    All correspondence, documents, and other materials shall be filed 
in accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule, which the NRC promulgated in 
August 2007 (72 FR 49,139).

    Issued at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day of August 2008.
E. Roy Hawkens,
Chief Administrative Judge, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel.
[FR Doc. E8-19380 Filed 8-20-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Chief Executive 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 Chyron Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael Wellesley-Wesley, President and Chief Executive 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:

(i) the Report complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

Dated:  November 10, 2005

| | /s/ Michael Wellesley-Wesley
| | ----------------------------
| | Michael Wellesley-Wesley    
| | President and               
| | Chief Executive Officer     
| |
**Exhibit 31.2**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

I, Jack Jaiven, certify that:

1.  I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of nStor Technologies, 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 suchstatements 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 theregistrant 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 registrantand 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 theregistrant, 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) Intentionally omitted.

     c) 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 andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

     d) 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 that has materiallyaffected, 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 ofregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

     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’sability 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: May 13, 2004 |        | By: /s/ Jack Jaiven |
|                    |  |  |
|                    |  | Jack Jaiven*  Interim Chief Financial Officer* |
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6320 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 6320

  To double the existing penalties for the provision of misleading or 
             inaccurate caller identification information.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 16, 2021

 Mr. Rice of South Carolina (for himself and Mr. Lamb) introduced the 
   following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                                Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To double the existing penalties for the provision of misleading or 
             inaccurate caller identification information.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Anti-Spoofing Penalties 
Modernization Act of 2021''.

SEC. 2. INCREASING PENALTIES FOR SPOOFERS.

     Section 227(e)(5) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 
227(e)(5)) is amended--
            (1) in subparagraph (A)(i)--
                    (A) by striking ``$10,000'' and inserting 
                ``$20,000''; and
                    (B) by striking ``$1,000,000'' and inserting 
                ``$2,000,000''; and
            (2) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``$10,000'' and 
        inserting ``$20,000''.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

v.

MALIK SAMUELS

PETITION OF: TODD MOSSER

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 146 EM 2019

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 10th day of March, 2020, in consideration of the Application to 

Withdraw as Counsel, this matter is REMANDED to the Court of Common Pleas of 

Philadelphia County for that court to determine whether Malik Samuel’s present counsel 

should be permitted to withdraw. 

The Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County is DIRECTED to enter its 

order regarding this remand within 60 days and to promptly notify this Court of its 

determination.
EXHIBIT 31(b)

I, Thomas A. Nardi, certify that:

1.	I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Peoples Energy Corporation;

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(s) 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 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 registrant'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(s) 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:  August 9, 2005

  /s/  Thomas A. Nardi
DISMISS and Opinion Filed July 15, 2024 

# S

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-24-00636-CV ZAVIERN ESTINICHO THOMAS, Appellant V. ROBERT ELIZONDO, FELLER TO WING & RECOVERY, LLC, RADE UTILITY CONSTRUCTION, INC, BRIAN FELLER, AND RADE CONSTRUCTION, INC., Appellees On Appeal from the 134th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-23-08289
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Reichek, Goldstein, and Garcia Opinion by Justice Reichek On June 18, 2024, we sent a letter to the parties questioning our jurisdiction over this appeal because it appears the co mplained-of judgment is not final or otherwise appealable. We directed appell ant to file a letter brief addressing our jurisdictional concern no later than June 28, 2024. We expressl y cautioned appellant that failure to do so might result in the dism issal of the appeal without further notice. To date, appellant has not f iled a letter brief nor furthe r corresponded with the Court regarding the status of this appeal.–2– Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b), (c).

240636F.P05 /Amanda L. Reichek / AMANDA L. REICHEK JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
ZAVIERN ESTINICHO THOMAS, Appellant

No. 05-24-00636-CV V.
ROBERT ELIZONDO, FELLER TOWING & RECOVERY, LLC, RADE UTILITY CONSTRUCTION, INC, BRIAN FELLER, AND RADE CONSTRUCTION, INC., Appellees On Appeal from the 134th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-23-08289. Opinion delivered by Justice Reichek. Justices Goldstein and Garcia participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opini on of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED

.
Judgment entered July 15, 2024
confinement. 

### See Bowen v. Warden, 100 Nev. 489, 686 P.2d 250 (1984).

Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 2

Saitta cc: Hon. Carolyn Ellsworth, District Judge Allen Stanislouis Heusner Attorney General/Las Vegas Eighth District Court Clerk

2 We have reviewed all documents that appellant has submitted in proper person to the clerk of this court in this matter, and we conclude that no relief based upon those submissions is warranted. To the extent that appellant has attempted to present claims or facts in those submissions which were not previously presented in the proceedings below, we have declined to consider them in the first instance.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 194Th )4Z1Z(9D
#### Juan Maurichal SIMON, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Sherman T. HATCHER, Respondent—Appellee.

No. 02-15940.

D.C. No. CV-97-00105-LRH-(LRL).

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted Feb. 12, 2003.

Decided March 20, 2003.

Before CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM *

Juan Maurichal Simon appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition. Simon contends that the district court erred by denying his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and insufficient evidence of malice. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253, and we affirm.

*238Simon has failed to rebut the presumption that counsel’s efforts were within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance. *See Strickland v. Washington,*466 U.S. 668, 689, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). Counsel presented adequate evidence relevant to Simon’s defense theory that he shot the victim in self-defense. Counsel put Simon on the stand to testify that he had bought a gun to protect himself from a third party. The defense’s ease-in-chief portrayed the victim as the aggressor. Counsel presented evidence that Simon was unable to leave the scene during the confrontation with the victim. There is no showing that more investigation by counsel would have produced helpful evidence of powder burns. Simon does not identify what other evidence counsel could have offered to support his self-defense theory. *See James v. Borg,*24 F.3d 20, 26 (9th Cir.1994) (“Conelusory allegations [of ineffective assistance of counsel] which are not supported by a statement of specific facts do not warrant habeas relief.”).

As part of his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, Simon argues that counsel inadequately presented evidence relevant to his theory of self-defense by fading to object to an allegedly erroneous jury instruction on the duty to retreat. We addressed this claim relating to instructions in *Simon v. Hatcher I,*No. 99-15726, 216 F.3d 1084 (9th Cir.2000) (unpublished memorandum decision) and concluded that it was procedurally barred. Simon cannot revive the claim now.

After viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, we conclude that any rational trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that Simon acted with malice. *See Jackson v. Virginia,*443 U.S. 307, 319, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979). Under Nevada law, malice may be inferred from the intentional use of a deadly weapon in a deadly and dangerous manner. *See Moser v. State,*91 Nev. 809, 812, 544 P.2d 424, 426 (1975). There was sufficient evidence from which the jury could conclude that Simon used his handgun in a deadly and dangerous manner: Simon fired six rounds at the victim in rapid succession, killing him with a shot in the back.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6277 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 6277

  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude ethylene from 
                taxation under the Superfund excise tax.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 14, 2021

  Mr. Moolenaar (for himself and Mr. Meuser) 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 exclude ethylene from 
                taxation under the Superfund excise tax.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Ethylene is Essential for Chemistry 
and Manufacturing Act''.

SEC. 2. EXCLUDING ETHYLENE FROM TAXATION UNDER SUPERFUND EXCISE TAX.

    (a) In General.--The table contained in section 4661(b) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking the row relating 
to ethylene.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall take 
effect on July 1, 2022.
                                 <all>
```
PHELPS DODGE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

                                   Exhibit 12

COMPUTATION OF TOTAL DEBT TO TOTAL CAPITALIZATION
(Unaudited; dollars in thousands)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                    March 31,       December 31,
                                                      1998              1997
                                                      ----              ----
<S>                                                <C>                <C>   
Short-term debt                                    $   86,200            91,400
Current portion of long-term debt                      63,900            54,800
Long-term debt                                        846,000           857,100
                                                   ----------        ----------
   Total debt                                         996,100         1,003,300
Minority interests in subsidiaries                    117,600           113,300
Common shareholders' equity                         2,651,300         2,510,400
                                                   ----------        ----------
   Total capitalization                            $3,765,000         3,627,000
                                                   ==========        ==========

Ratio of total debt to total
 capitalization                                          26.5%             27.7%
                                                   ==========        ==========
</TABLE>