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

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 50 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 50

Disapproving the extension of the waiver authority contained in section 
 402(c) of the Trade Act of 1974 with respect to the People's Republic 
                               of China.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 5, 2001

  Mr. Rohrabacher (for himself and Mr. Brown of Ohio) introduced the 
following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Ways 
                               and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
Disapproving the extension of the waiver authority contained in section 
 402(c) of the Trade Act of 1974 with respect to the People's Republic 
                               of China.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That the Congress does not 
approve the extension of the authority contained in section 402(c) of 
the Trade Act of 1974 recommended by the President to the Congress on 
June 1, 2001, with respect to the People's Republic of China.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 181 (Wednesday, September 17, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 53856]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-21681]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Oak Ridge 
Reservation

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental 
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Oak Ridge 
Reservation. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. No. 92-463, 86 
Stat. 770) requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in 
the Federal Register.

DATES: Wednesday, October 8, 2008, 6 p.m.

ADDRESSES: DOE Information Center, 475 Oak Ridge Turnpike, Oak Ridge, 
Tennessee.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pat Halsey, Federal Coordinator, 
Department of Energy Oak Ridge Operations Office, P.O. Box 2001, EM-90, 
Oak Ridge, TN 37831. Phone (865) 576-4025; Fax (865) 576-2347 or e-
mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d0b8b1bca3b5a9a0ba90bfa2bffeb4bfb5feb7bfa6"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c4aca5a8b7a1bdb4ae84abb6abeaa0aba1eaa3abb2">[email protected]</span></a> or check the Web site at http://www.oakridge.doe.gov/em/ssab.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make 
recommendations to DOE in the areas of environmental restoration, waste 
management, and related activities.
    Tentative Agenda: The main presentation is on ``Project Baseline 
Summaries and the Budget Information Process.''
    Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. Written 
statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the 
meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements pertaining to the 
agenda item should contact Pat Halsey at the address or telephone 
number listed above. Requests must be received five days prior to the 
meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include the 
presentation in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is 
empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the 
orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comment 
will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments.
    Minutes: Minutes will be available by writing or calling Pat Halsey 
at the address and phone number listed above. Minutes will also be 
available at the following Web site: http://www.oakridge.doe.gov/em/ssab/minutes.htm.

    Issued at Washington, DC, on September 12, 2008.
Rachel Samuel,
Deputy Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. E8-21681 Filed 9-16-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### STATE of Florida ex rel. CITY OF ARCADIA, a Municipality, Relator, v. Lee O. DANIEL, City Recorder of City of Arcadia, Respondent.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Aug. 3, 1936.

Leitner & Leitner, of Arcadia, for relat- or.

M. A. Rosin, of Arcadia, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

This case is in all respects like the case, which we had under consideration entitled Boykin v. Town of River Junction, 169 So. 492, in which opinion was filed here on the 17th day of July, 1936, and the case *646of Roach v. City of Tampa et al. (Fla.) 169 So. 627, opinion filed at this term of the court, except that in the River Junction Case there was involved addition to, and betterment of, an electric light plant, and in the City of Tampa Case, supra, there was.involved improvements and addition to a municipal hospital, while in the instant case the improvements and bet-terments involved are to be made to a waterworks system.

In this case alternative writ of mandamus was issued. To the writ motion to quash was interposed and briefs filed by the respective parties.

The legal principles enunciated in the case of Boykin v. Town of River Junction are applicable here and, on authority of the judgments and opinions in those cases, the motion to quash the alternative writ of mandamus is denied and, unless return .be made within five days from the entry of this order, peremptory writ of mandamus will issue.

WHITFIELD, C. J., and TERRELL, BROWN, BUFORD, and DAVIS, JJ., concur.

ELLIS, P. J.,

concurs upon the principle announced in his specially concurring opinion in the case of State ex rel. City of Vero Beach v. MacConnell (Fla.) 169 So. 628, this day filed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                   5
<MULTIPLIER>                            1,000
       
<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                 JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                    JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                      MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                297,921
<SECURITIES>                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                      13,408,735
<ALLOWANCES>                          394,433
<INVENTORY>                        11,981,635
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                   26,786,878
<PP&E>                             59,392,800
<DEPRECIATION>                     24,946,667
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                     61,995,213
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>              16,379,099
<BONDS>                            27,109,229
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0
<PREFERRED>                                 0
<COMMON>                               70,047
<OTHER-SE>                         18,436,838
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>       61,995,213
<SALES>                            47,616,710
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                   47,687,196
<CGS>                              36,428,041
<TOTAL-COSTS>                      43,793,978
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                    754,202
<INCOME-PRETAX>                     3,139,016
<INCOME-TAX>                        1,271,255
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                 1,867,761
<DISCONTINUED>                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0
<CHANGES>                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                        1,867,761
<EPS-PRIMARY>                             .27
<EPS-DILUTED>                             .27
        


</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Randolph L. Chambers

v. Civil No. 04-cv-397-JD

Warden, New Hampshire State Prison

ORDER

On May 11, 2005, this Court issued a Report and

Recommendation addressing a motion for a preliminary injunction

filed by Plaintiff Randolph L. Chambers. It has come to the

Court’s attention that the Report and Recommendation

inadvertently indicates at page 14 that “the Plaintiff has

demonstrated that he is likely to succeed on the merits.” The

Court intended to state that “the Plaintiff has not demonstrated

that he is likely to succeed on the merits.” Accordingly, the

text of the May 11, 2005 Report and Recommendation is hereby

amended by this corrective order.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: June 6, 2005 

Case 1:04-cv-00397-JD Document 20 Filed 06/06/05 Page 1 of 2
2

cc: Randolph L. Chambers, pro se

Laura E. B. Lombardi, Esq.

Case 1:04-cv-00397-JD Document 20 Filed 06/06/05 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 79 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.J.Res.79

                      One Hundred Seventh Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
             the third day of January, two thousand and one

                            Joint Resolution

 
 Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2002, and 
                           for other purposes.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That Public Law 107-44 is 
further amended by striking the date specified in section 107(c) and 
inserting in lieu thereof ``January 10, 2002''; and by striking the 
date specified in section 123 and inserting in lieu thereof ``January 
1, 2002''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
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

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
officers of Rand Capital Corporation (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:

The Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2016 (the Form 10-Q) of the Company fully complies with the requirement of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 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: August 2, 2016 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ Allen F. Grum
Allen F. Grum, President (Chief Executive Officer)           
|                      |  |  | 
|Dated: August 2, 2016 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ Daniel P.
Penberthy Daniel P. Penberthy, Treasurer(Chief Financial Officer)
Exhibit 31.a  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Edward Munden, President & Chief Executive Officer of DataJungle Software Inc., certify that: (1)I have reviewed this report on Form 10-QSB of DataJungle Software 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 operation and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods represented in this report;  (4)The small business issuer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 small business issuer 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 small business issuer, 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 small business issuer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 small business issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuers most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonable likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting; and  (5)The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer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 small business issuer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 small business issuers internal controls over financial reporting.  /s/Edward Munden Edward Munden President & Chief Executive Officer Date: August 14, 2006
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                       3,352,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   52,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               253,000
<PP&E>                                       5,300,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,957,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          960,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                   108,568,000
<OTHER-SE>                                (100,571,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,957,000
<SALES>                                      3,882,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,936,000
<CGS>                                          210,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  673,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                32,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,221,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          3,221,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,221,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .34
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .34
        

</TABLE>
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7113 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to prohibit sums in the Thrift Savings 

Fund from being invested in any security of an entity based in the 

Russian Federation, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 17, 2022 

Mr. BUDD introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Oversight and Reform 

A BILL 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to prohibit sums 

in the Thrift Savings Fund from being invested in any 

security of an entity based in the Russian Federation, 

and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Terminating Securities 

5 from Putin Act of 2022’’ or the ‘‘TSP Act of 2022’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7113 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON ANY TSP FUND INVESTING IN EN2 TITIES BASED IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 8438 of title 5, United 

4 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol5 lowing: 

6 ‘‘(i) Notwithstanding any other provision of this sec7 tion, no fund established or overseen by the Board may 

8 include an investment in any security of an entity based 

9 in the Russian Federation.’’. 

10 (b) DIVESTITURE OF ASSETS.—Not later than 30 

11 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Federal 

12 Retirement Thrift Investment Board established under 

13 section 8472(a) of title 5, United States Code, shall— 

14 (1) review whether any sums in the Thrift Sav15 ings Fund are invested in violation of subsection (i) 

16 of section 8438 of that title, as added by subsection 

17 (a) of this section; 

18 (2) if any sums are invested in the manner de19 scribed in paragraph (1), divest those sums in a 

20 manner that is consistent with the legal and fidu21 ciary duties provided under chapter 84 of that title, 

22 or any other applicable provision of law; and 

23 (3) reinvest any sums divested under paragraph 

24 (2) in investments that do not violate subsection (i) 

25 of section 8438 of that title, as added by subsection 

26 (a) of this section. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 7113 IH

1 SEC. 3. PROHIBITION ON INVESTMENT OF TSP FUNDS IN 

2 ENTITIES BASED IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERA3 TION THROUGH THE TSP MUTUAL FUND WIN4 DOW. 

5 Section 8438(b)(5) of title 5, United States Code, is 

6 amended by adding at the end the following: 

7 ‘‘(E) A mutual fund accessible through a mu8 tual fund window authorized under this paragraph 

9 may not include an investment in any security of— 

10 ‘‘(i) an entity based in the Russian Fed11 eration; or 

12 ‘‘(ii) any subsidiary that is owned or oper13 ated by an entity described in clause (i).’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

June 1, 2012 

h0529 

Order 

 

June 1, 2012 

145093 

____________________________________ 

 SC: 145093 

In re P.M. WILSON, Minor. COA: 304689 

 Branch CC Family Division: 

____________________________________ 10-004457-NA 

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, 

 Petitioner-Appellee, 

v 

DONALD FRICK, 

 Respondent-Appellant. 

____________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 21, 2012 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
K.L.L., A CHILD,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-5840

_____________________________/

Opinion filed August 28, 2017.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Nassau County.

Adrian G. Soud, Judge.

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Lori A. Willner, Assistant Public Defender, 

Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Heather Flanagan Ross, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The juvenile appellant, K.L.L., appeals a final disposition order adjudicating 

her delinquent, following a guilty plea, and committing her to the custody of the 

Department of Juvenile Justice for placement in a non-secure residential program. 
2

In so doing, the trial court deviated from the Department’s recommendation of 

probation. 

We disagree with the appellant’s characterization of the trial court’s findings, 

which were well-reasoned and supported by competent, substantial evidence. 

However, we agree with the appellant that the trial court erred in committing her

without first requesting a commitment level recommendation from the 

Department. See B.K.A. v. State, 122 So. 3d 928, 930 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013); A.L.M. 

v. State, 176 So. 3d 1025 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015). 

Accordingly, we AFFIRM the portion of the disposition order adjudicating 

the appellant delinquent, but we REVERSE the non-secure residential commitment 

and REMAND to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with the opinions 

in B.K.A. and A.L.M., as well as section 985.433(7), Florida Statutes.

ROBERTS, MAKAR and JAY, JJ., CONCUR.
#### Thelbert E. OSBORNE v. MOSSLER ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION et al.

No. 2904.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

June 30, 1947.

Rehearing Denied Aug. 27, 1947.

Writ of Certiorari Granted Oct. 7, 1947.

J. S. Pickett, of Many, for appellant.

S. I. Foster, of Leesville, for appellees.

DORE, Judge.

For the reasons assigned in the opinion this day handed down in the consolidated cases of Sarah B. Osborne and Thelbert E. Osborne v. Mossier Acceptance Corporation et al., it is ordered that the judgment in favor of the plaintiff is reduced to the sum of $257.50, the said amount to be as an off-set of the judgment in favor of the defendant on the reconventional demand, and as thus amended it is affirmed.

It is further ordered that the judgment in favor of the defendant on the reconventional demand be and the same is hereby affirmed.

It is further ordered that the plaintiff pay the costs of this appeal; all other costs to be paid by the plaintiff and the defendant in equal proportion, or one-half by each.
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.22

          PLAN PARTICIPANTS OF THE DURA AUTOMOTIVE SYSTEMS, INC. 2003
           SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN AS OF MARCH 1, 2005


Participant name:

  David R. Bovee
  Lawrence A. Denton
  John J. Knappenberger
  Milton D. Kniss
  Alfred C. Liddell
  Keith R. Marchiando
  Theresa L. Skotak
  Karl F. Storrie
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Miguel Ortiz

v. Civil No. 05-cv-350-SM

Larry Blaisdell, Warden,

Northern New Hampshire Correctional Facility

O R D E R

 For reasons unknown, but clearly through no fault of

petitioner, an order of January 26, 2007 was neither docketed nor

sent to petitioner by the Clerk’s office. The stay in existence

on January 26, 2007 is re-instituted to January 26, 2007 nunc pro

tunc. The thirty day period referenced in the “conclusion” is

ordered to commence on July 11, 2007. 

SO ORDERED.

____________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: July 11, 2007

cc: Miguel Ortiz, pro se

Case 1:05-cv-00350-JL Document 14 Filed 07/11/07 Page 1 of 1