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

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 82 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
107th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. J. RES. 82

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
            Recognizing the 91st birthday of Ronald Reagan.

Whereas February 6, 2002, is the 91st birthday of Ronald Wilson Reagan;
Whereas Ronald Reagan is the first former President ever to attain the age of 
        91;
Whereas both Ronald Reagan and his wife Nancy Reagan have distinguished records 
        of public service to the United States, the American people, and the 
        international community;
Whereas Ronald Reagan was twice elected by overwhelming margins as President of 
        the United States;
Whereas Ronald Reagan fulfilled his pledge to help restore ``the great, 
        confident roar of American progress, growth, and optimism'' and ensure 
        renewed economic prosperity;
Whereas Ronald Reagan's leadership was instrumental in extending freedom and 
        democracy around the globe and uniting a world divided by the Cold War;
Whereas Ronald Reagan is loved and admired by millions of Americans, and by 
        countless others around the world;
Whereas Ronald Reagan's eloquence united Americans in times of triumph and 
        tragedy;
Whereas Nancy Reagan not only served as a gracious First Lady but also led a 
        national crusade against illegal drug use;
Whereas, together Ronald and Nancy Reagan dedicated their lives to promoting 
        national pride and to bettering the quality of life in the United States 
        and throughout the world; and
Whereas the thoughts and prayers of the Congress and the country are with Ronald 
        Reagan in his courageous battle with Alzheimer's disease: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That the Congress, on behalf 
of the American people, extends its birthday greetings and best wishes 
to Ronald Reagan on his 91st birthday.

            Passed the House of Representatives February 6, 2002.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
107th CONGRESS

  1d Session

                             H. J. RES. 82

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

            Recognizing the 91st birthday of Ronald Reagan.
```
Blueprint






 






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 for Digatrade Financial Corp on
Form 20-F/A for the year ended December 31, 2018 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report), the undersigned, Brad J. Moynes, Chief Executive
Officer do hereby 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 our knowledge:


 


 



(1)            

The Report fully
complies with the requirements of section 13(a) 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.


 


 


By:


 


 



/s/ Brad J.
Moynes                                           


Brad J.
Moynes


Chief
Executive Officer


August
21, 2019


 




 








 






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 for Digatrade Financial Corp on
Form 20-F/A for the year ended December 31, 2018 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report), the undersigned, Brad J. Moynes, Chief Financial
Officer do hereby 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 our knowledge:


 


 



(1)            

The Report fully
complies with the requirements of section 13(a) 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.


 


 


By:


 


 



/s/ Brad J.
Moynes                                           


Brad J.
Moynes


Chief
Financial Officer


August
21, 2019
#### W. T. PERRITT, Tutor, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF WEST MONROE, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 5844.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Second Circuit.

Jan. 10, 1939.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 6, 1939.

Writ of Certiorari and Review Denied April 3, 1939.

McBride & Goff, of.Ruston, for appellant.

Hudson, Potts, Bernstein & Snellings, of Monroe, and W. Decker Moore,, of West Monroe, for appellee.

TALIAFERRO, Judge.

This cáse grew out of the same accident involved in the suit on the docket of this court, decided today, styled Harry P. Clinton, Tutor, v. City of West Monroe, 187 So. 561, and for the reasons therein assigned, 'the judgment herein appealed from is affirmed at plaintiff’s cost.
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. J ES US M ARI O SER RANO - PE RE Z, A K A A ri elS al do var- P er ez , A K A Jam es S e rr a no, A K A J e s us S e rr a no, A K A J e s us M . S e rr a no, D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e llan t. N o. 11- 50058 D . C . N o. 2: 10 -c r- 00 88 3-S JO -1 ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e C e n tr a l D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia S . J a m e s O t e r o, D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d Jul y17, 2012 ** B efo re: S C H R O E D E R , T H O M A S an dS IL V E R M A N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. Je sus M ar i o S errano -P er ez appeal s f rom hi s 60-m on th sent ence , i m po se d a f t e rhi s gui l typl e at o be i ng a n i l l e ga l a l i e n f ound i n the U ni t e d S t a t e s a f t e rha vi ng 

# FI LED JU L 19 2012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALSW e dec l i ne t o revi ew S errano -P er ez ’ s i neff ec t i ve as si st ance of coun se l 1 cl ai m because the re cord i s notsuff i ci ent l y devel op ed t o p erm i tre vi ew on di re ct ap p e a l. See U

n i ted Sta tes v. L ea su re , 31 9 F . 3d 10 92 , 10 99 (9th C i r. 20 03 ). 2 11- 50058 be e n pr e vi ous l yr e m ove d, i n vi ol a t i on of 8 U . S . C . § 1326( a ) . P ur s uantt o A nder s v . Ca lifo rn ia , 386 U . S . 738 ( 1967) , S e rr ano- P e r e z ’ s c ouns e l ha s f i l e d abr i e f

s t a t i ng the r e a r e no gr ounds f

orr e l i e f , a l ong w i th am ot i on t o w i thdr aw a s c ouns e l of re cord. A pp el l anthas f i l ed a pro se supp l em ent albri ef . O uri nde pe nde ntr e vi e w of the r e c or d pur s uantt o P e n s o n v . O h io , 4 8 8 U . S. 7 5 , 8 0 - 8 1 ( 1 9 8 8 ) , d is c lo s e s n o a r g u ab le g r o u n d s f o rr e lie f o n d ir e c t ap p e a l. 1 A cco rd i n g l y, co u n sel ’ s m o t i o n t o w i th d raw i s G R A N TED , and the di stri ct co u rt ’ s j u d g m en ti s A FFI R M ED .
August 3, 2017

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

________________________________

NO. 14-16-00681-CV

UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS M.D. ANDERSON CANCER CENTER, Appellant

V.

LANCE MCKENZIE, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE 

ESTATE OF COURTNEY MCKENZIE-THUE (DECEASED), DEBORAH 

DIVER, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT FRIEND OF J.O., A MINOR, 

Appellees

________________________________

This cause, an appeal from the order denying the plea to the jurisdiction of 

appellant, the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, signed August 23, 

2016, was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and 

find no error in the order. We AFFIRM the order of the court below.

We order appellant, the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, 

jointly and severally, to pay all costs incurred in this appeal. 

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

ANALOG DEVICES, INC.,

Appellant

v.

XILINX ASIA PACIFIC PTE. LTD., XILINX, INC.,

Appellees

______________________

2022-1819

______________________

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2020-

01596.

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

In re: XILINX, INC., XILINX ASIA PACIFIC PTE. 

LTD.,

Appellants

______________________

2022-1857

______________________

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2020-

01596.

______________________

Case: 22-1819 Document: 18 Page: 1 Filed: 12/12/2022
2 IN RE: XILINX, INC.

ON MOTION

______________________

Before STARK, Circuit Judge.

O R D E R

Upon consideration of Analog Devices, Inc.’s unopposed motion to voluntarily dismiss Appeal No. 2022-

1819, pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 

42(b), and to withdraw from Appeal No. 2022-1857,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The motion is granted. Appeal No. 2022-1819 is 

dismissed. Analog Devices is withdrawn from Appeal No. 

2022-1857. The revised official captions and short caption 

for Appeal No. 2022-1857 are reflected in this order.

(2) Each side shall bear its own costs as to Appeal No. 

2022-1819.

(3) The United States Patent and Trademark Office 

(“PTO”) is directed to inform the court within 30 days of 

the date of filing of this order whether it intends to intervene in Appeal No. 2022-1857.

(4) If the PTO elects to participate as intervenor, its 

docketing statement is due within 14 days of the date of 

filing of its notice of intervention and its brief is due 

within 40 days of the date of filing of Xilinx, Inc. and 

Xilinx Asia Pacific Pte. Ltd.’s (collectively, “Xilinx”) opening brief. 

Case: 22-1819 Document: 18 Page: 2 Filed: 12/12/2022
IN RE: XILINX, INC 3

(5) Xilinx’s opening brief is due within 60 days of the 

date of filing of this order.

December 12, 2022

 Date

FOR THE COURT

/s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

Peter R. Marksteiner

Clerk of Court

ISSUED AS A MANDATE (AS TO 2022-1819 ONLY): 

December 12, 2022

Case: 22-1819 Document: 18 Page: 3 Filed: 12/12/2022
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 Quarterly Report of Eagle Broadband, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q/A for the period ending November 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Richard
R. Royall, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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.

Date:  March 30, 2004


/S/Richard R. Royall
--------------------
Richard R. Royall,
Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.1





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





In connection with the Quarterly Report
of alpha-En Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
“Report”), I, Jerome I. Feldman,Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, Chief
Financial Officer and Treasurer,
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.





November
      15, 2010
            /s/
      Jerome I. Feldman
              Jerome
      I. Feldman
              Chairman,
      Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and
    Treasurer
#### Roland E. CROWTHERS, Appellant, v. Raymond S. BENNETT, Appellee.

Supreme Court of Florida. Division. A.

Oct. 26, 1954.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### Freddie J. HILBISH, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 45781.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 18, 1972.

Thomas V. Priolo, Amarillo, for appellant.

Tom Curtis, Dist. Atty., and F. G. Shackelford, Asst. Dist. Atty., Amarillo, and Jim D. Vollers, State’s Atty., Robert A. Huttash, Asst. State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

OPINION

MORRISON, Judge.

This is an appeal from a revocation of probation.

Appellant was convicted of robbery on November 14, 1969, assessed a five (5) year sentence and placed on probation. Among the conditions of probation was a provision that he not violate the law.

The petition for revocation of probation alleged that he violated the law in that he' stole “a motorcycle of the value of over $50.00”.

Appellant first contends the evidence does not establish that the value of the motorcycle was over $50.

 The record reflects that the owner of the motorcycle testified that it was approximately five months old and that it was priced at $229. A photograph of the machine, which depicts a “mini-bike” apparently in working order, was introduced into evidence. Amarillo Police Officer Charles Peters testified that he was famil*555iar with the value of motorcycles in Potter County on the date the vehicle was taken and that its value was between $175 and $250. This, we have concluded, is sufficient to show that the same was of the value of over $50. Further, at a revocation of probation proceeding, it is not necessary to prove the value of the stolen item is over $50. The fact that it has some value and was taken by the probationer in violation of a condition of his probation controls. Foote v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 463 S.W.2d 445; Barnes v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 467 S.W.2d 437.

Appellant next contends the evidence is insufficient to support the revocation since it is based on the testimony of an accomplice. Appellant's co-conspirator, Warton, testified that the appellant participated with him in the theft of the minibike. In a review of probation proceeding the testimony of an accomplice is sufficient to authorize the trial court to revoke probation. Hulsey v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 447 S.W.2d 165.

Further, appellant, testifying in his own behalf, admitted on cross examination that he participated in the theft by driving the “get away car” and answered the following question in the affirmative:

> “Q And then you took the car over there for him to load it up in the car ?”

Appellant next contends, without discussion or authority, that Art. 42.12, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P., the Adult Probation Statute, is unconstitutional because it does not permit trial by jury, does not provide for bail pending revocation and sanctions incarceration for a crime not based on an indictment. Initially we note the appellant did not properly preserve these contentions for review. He did not request a trial by jury or bail pending revocation. Further, his contentions have been answered adversely to him in Hulsey v. State, Tex.Cr. App., 447 S.W.2d 165; Ex parte Jones, Tex.Cr.App., 460 S.W.2d 428 and Manning v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 412 S.W.2d 656, respectively.

Finding no abuse of discretion, the judgment is affirmed.
IB

Union Calendar No. 134

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1456

[Report No. 107–223]

To expand the boundary of the Booker T. Washington National Monument,

and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 4, 2001

Mr. GOODE (for himself, Mr. SCHROCK, Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia, Mr.

SCOTT, Mr. MORAN of Virginia, and Mr. BOUCHER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Resources

SEPTEMBER 28, 2001

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union

and ordered to be printed

A BILL

To expand the boundary of the Booker T. Washington

National Monument, 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 ‘‘Booker T. Washington

5 National Monument Boundary Adjustment Act of 2001’’.
2

•HR 1456 RH

1 SEC. 2. BOUNDARY OF BOOKER T. WASHINGTON NATIONAL

2 MONUMENT EXPANDED.

3 The Act entitled ‘‘An Act to provide for the establish4 ment of the Booker T. Washington National Monument’’,

5 approved April 2, 1956 (16 U.S.C. 450ll et seq.), is

6 amended by adding at the end the following new section:

7 ‘‘SEC. 5. ADDITIONAL LANDS.

8 ‘‘(a) LANDS ADDED TO MONUMENT.—The boundary

9 of the Booker T. Washington National Monument is modi10 fied to include the approximately 15 acres, as generally

11 depicted on the map entitled ‘‘Boundary Map, Booker T.

12 Washington National Monument, Franklin County, Vir13 ginia’’, numbered BOWA 404/80,024, and dated February

14 2001. The map shall be on file and available for inspection

15 in the appropriate offices of the National Park Service,

16 Department of the Interior.

17 ‘‘(b) ACQUISITION OF ADDITIONAL LANDS.—The

18 Secretary of the Interior is authorized to acquire from

19 willing owners the land or interests in land described in

20 subsection (a) by donation, purchase with donated or ap21 propriated funds, or exchange.

22 ‘‘(c) ADMINISTRATION OF ADDITIONAL LANDS.—

23 Lands added to the Booker T. Washington National

24 Monument by subsection (a) shall be administered by the

25 Secretary of the Interior as part of the monument in ac26 cordance with applicable laws and regulations.’’.

Union Calendar No. 134

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1456

[Report No. 107–223]

A BILL

To expand the boundary of the Booker T. Washington National Monument, and for other purposes.

SEPTEMBER 28, 2001

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the

State of the Union and ordered to be printed
Case 1:07-mc-00023-T-DLM Document 3-1 Filed 05/01/2007 Page 1 of

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND

GERARD BOULANGER,

Plaintiff,

v. NH 06-cv-00308-ECT

RI MC 07-23 T

WARREN DOWALIBY, et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER

GRANTING IN PART

MOTION TO COMPEL

Before the Court is the Motion for Order Compelling

Discovery and Sanctions ("Motion" or "Motion to Compel") filed by

Defendants Warren Dowaliby, Jeffrey McPherson, Linda Lee, Bruce

Pelkie, and Donna Roy (the "Moving Defendants") filed on or about

April 12, 2007. By the Motion, Moving Defendants seek to compel

Plaintiff Gerard Boulanger ("Plaintiff") to provide complete

answers to the interrogatories which they propounded to him on

February 6, 2007. See Motion at 1. A copy of Plaintiff's

responses to the interrogatories are attached to the Motion as

Attachment ("Att.") A. Also attached to the Motion is a copy of

a letter from Moving Defendants' counsel to Plaintiff which

explains how responses are incomplete and calls upon him to

provide complete answers. See id. , Att. B (Letter from Belobrow

to Plaintiff of 3/13/07). According to the Motion, Moving

Defendants have not received a reply to their letter from

Plaintiff. See Motion at 1.

After reviewing Plaintiff's responses to the interrogatories

and his objection to the Motion, see Objection to Defendants[']

Motion to Compel[] Discovery, the Court agrees that Plaintiff's

responses are incomplete for the reasons set forth in counsel's

March 13, 2007, letter. Accordingly, the Motion to Compel is

GRANTED to the following extent. Plaintiff shall within thirty

Case 1:06-cv-00308-SM Document 47 Filed 05/01/07 Page 1 of 2
Case 1 : 07-mc-00023-T-DLM Document 3-1 Filed 05/01 /2007 Page 2 of

days of the date of this order supplement his answers to the

interrogatories and provide Moving Defendants with the

information they seek with regard to questions two, three, four,

eight, and ten of the interrogatories as that information has

been identified in the letter from Moving Defendants' counsel of

March 13, 2007, a copy of which is attached to this Order. To

the extent that Moving Defendants seek sanctions against

Plaintiff, the Motion is denied at this time.

Plaintiff is advised that failure to comply with this Order

could result in the Court imposing sanctions on him which could

include dismissal of his claims against the Moving Defendants.

So ordered.

ENTER:

/s/ David L. Martin

DAVID L. MARTIN

United States Magistrate Judge

May 1, 2007

2

Case 1:06-cv-00308-SM Document 47 Filed 05/01/07 Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANTTO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Covance Inc. (“Covance”) on Form 10-Q for the periodended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the “Report”), I, William E. Klitgaard, Corporate SeniorVice President and Chief Financial Officer of Covance, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)          TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)          Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of Covance.

 
| Date:  | May 4, 2009 |                                                           |   |   |
|--------|------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|
|   |             |                                                           |
|   |             | /s/ William E.  Klitgaard                                      |   |
|   |             |      William  E. Klitgaard            |
|   |             |      Corporate  Senior Vice President |
|   |             |      and  Chief Financial Officer     |
|   |             |      (Principal  Financial Officer)   |

 

----