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

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 984 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                         July 14, 2008.
Whereas pioneering men and women, known as cowboys, helped establish the 
        American West;
Whereas the cowboy embodies honesty, integrity, courage, compassion, respect, a 
        strong work ethic, and patriotism;
Whereas the cowboy spirit exemplifies strength of character, sound family 
        values, and good common sense;
Whereas the cowboy archetype transcends ethnicity, gender, geographic 
        boundaries, and political affiliation;
Whereas the cowboy is an excellent steward of the land and its creatures;
Whereas the cowboy lives off the land and works to protect and enhance the 
        environment;
Whereas cowboy traditions have been part of the American culture for 
        generations;
Whereas the cowboy continues to be an important part of the economy, through the 
        work of approximately 727,000 ranchers in all 50 States, and contributes 
        to the well-being of nearly every county in the Nation;
Whereas annual attendance at professional and working ranch rodeo events exceeds 
        27,000,000 fans, and the rodeo is the 7th most watched sport in the 
        Nation;
Whereas membership and participation in rodeo and other organizations that 
        promote and encompass the livelihood of the cowboy spans race, gender, 
        and generations;
Whereas the cowboy is a central figure in literature, film, and music, and 
        occupies a central place in the public imagination;
Whereas the cowboy is an American icon; and
Whereas the ongoing contributions made by cowboys and cowgirls to their 
        communities should be recognized and encouraged: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) expresses support for the designation of a ``National Day of the 
        Cowboy''; and
            (2) encourages the people of the United States to observe the day 
        with appropriate ceremonies and activities.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
EXHIBIT  23.2

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
            --------------------------------------------------------


Pizza  Inn,  Inc.
The  Colony,  Texas


We  hereby  consent  to  the  incorporation  by  reference  in  the Registration
Statements  on  Forms S-8 (Nos. 33-56590, 33-71700, as amended by Post-Effective
Amendments  No. One and Two, 333-77617, and 333-76296) of Pizza Inn, Inc. of our
report  dated  August 16, 2005 relating to the consolidated financial statements
and  financial  statement  schedule,  which  appears  in  this  Form  10-K.


/s/ BDP Seidman, LLP

BDO  Seidman,  LLP

Dallas,  Texas
September  23,  2005
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO 

Senior District Judge Richard P. Matsch

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02311-RPM

AQUA-MEDIC, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

PUBLIC ADJUSTERS OF COLORADO, LLC, and

WILLIAM PAUL McLOUGHLIN,

Defendants.

_____________________________________________________________________

ORDER FOR REMAND

_____________________________________________________________________

On September 1, 2011, defendants filed a notice of removal of this civil action

from the District Court, Larimer County, Colorado, based on 28 U.S.C. § 1332,

conferring jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship. The defendants state that they

are a Colorado corporation and a private citizen residing in Littleton, Colorado. 28

U.S.C. § 1441(b) expressly limits removal by excluding actions removable by

defendants who are citizens of the state in which the action is brought. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that this civil action is remanded to the District Court, Larimer County,

Colorado.

DATED: September 6th, 2011

BY THE COURT:

s/Richard P. Matsch

__________________________

Richard P. Matsch, Senior Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02311-RPM Document 3 Filed 09/06/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Case No. 11-cv-01948-NYW-CBS

KATHRYN KIPLING,

Plaintiff,

v.

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, doing business as,

Minnesota Division of State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company,

Defendant.

FINAL JUDGMENT

PURSUANT to and in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(a) and the

Memorandum Opion and Order entered by the Honorable Nina Y. Wang on February 3,

2016, and incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth, it is

ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (doc # 146) is

GRANTED, and Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment 9doc. # 149) is DENIED. 

FURTHER ORDERED that final judgment is hereby entered in favor of

Defendant, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, and against Plaintiff, 

Kathryn Kipling. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

Company shall have its costs by the filing of a Bill of Costs, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.

58 and D.C.COLO.LCivR 54.1, with the Clerk of this Court within fourteen (14) days of

entry of judgment. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s Complaint and this civil action are

Case 1:11-cv-01948-NYW-CBS Document 165 Filed 02/04/16 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
DISMISSED with prejudice.

DATED at Denver, Colorado this 4th day of February, 2016.

FOR THE COURT:

JEFFREY P. COLWELL, CLERK

s/ N. Marble 

N. Marble,

Deputy Clerk

2

Case 1:11-cv-01948-NYW-CBS Document 165 Filed 02/04/16 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
|   **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 Cannabis Science, Inc., (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2015, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert Kane, 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 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 results of operations of the Company. |

By: */s/ Robert Kane*Robert KaneChief Financial Officer, Principal Accounting Officer

November 23, 2015
**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





I,
      Arthur
      Nadata, Chief Executive Officer of Nu Horizons Electronics Corp., certify
      that:




The
      Form
      10-K/A of Nu Horizons Electronics Corp. for the period ended February 28, 2007
      fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange
      Act of 1934; and




The
      information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of Nu Horizons Electronics
      Corp. for the periods presented.


/s/
                    Arthur
                    NadataArthur
                            Nadata
                          Chairman
                            of the Board and CEO
                          
                          Date:
                            November 21,
                            2007


A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      Nu Horizons Electronics Corp. and will be retained by Nu Horizons Electronics
      Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
      upon
      request.
Opinion filed April 21 , 20 22



### In The 

# Eleventh Court of Appeals

__________ No. 11

- 2 1

- 00 1 06

- CR

__________ DARYL WAYNE WRIGHT , Appellant
V

. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 244 t h District Court Ect or County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. C

- 18

- 1072

- CR

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N The jury convicted Daryl Wayne Wright of the offense of assault family violence by impeding breathing. Appellant pled true to two enhancement allegations, and the jury assessed his punishment at imprison ment for thirty years

. W e affirm

. Appellant’s court

- appointed counsel has filed in this court a motion to withdraw. The motion is supported by a brief in which counsel professionally and conscientiously examines the record and applicable law and concludes that th ere are2 no meritorious issues to raise on appeal

. Counsel provided Appellant with a copy of
the brief , a copy of the motion to withdraw , and a copy of both the clerk’s record and the reporter’s record. Couns el advised Appellant of his right to review the record and file a response to counsel’s brief

. Counsel also advised Appellant of hi s right to file a petition for discretionary review with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals seeking review by that court

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 68

. Court

- appointed counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Kelly v. State , 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman , 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); and Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503 (Te x. Crim. App. 1991)

. A ppellant has not filed a response to counsel’s Anders brief

. F ollowing the procedures outlined in Anders and Schulman , we have independently reviewed the record, and we agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. 1 We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw , and we affirm the judgment of the
trial court.

PER CURIAM April 21 , 20 22 Do not publish. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b). Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J., Trott er , J., and Will iams , J.

1 We note that Appellant has a right to file a petition for discretionary review pursuant to Rule 68 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure

.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Honorable Marcia S. Krieger

Criminal Action No. 11-cr-00355-MSK

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

1. WAUNITA WEINGART

2. JOHN PHILLIP GALLEGOS

3. ALOIS CRAIG WEINGART

Defendants.

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION 

TO MODIFY CONDITIONS OF RELEASE

THIS MATTER is before the Court following a Motion Hearing held October 14, 2011,

wherein the Court granted Defendant John Phillip Gallegos’ Unopposed Motion to Modify

Conditions of Release (#37). In accordance with the Court’s ruling, 

IT IS ORDERED that:

1. Mr. Gallegos’ United States Passport, previously surrendered to and in the

custody of the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, shall

be released to Mr. Gallegos or his counsel;

2. Mr. Gallegos is permitted to travel to Alaska and Hawaii, and to

destinations served by Alaska Airlines in Canada and Mexico for the purpose of work

assignments by Alaska Airlines, only; and,

3. Mr. Gallegos shall report to his supervising probation officer all

international flight assignments when such assignments are made, his itinerary, any

Case 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 43 Filed 10/17/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
changes to his itinerary that occur while on assignment, and to notify his probation

officer immediately upon his return to the United States.

DATED this 17th day of October, 2011.

BY THE COURT:

Marcia S. Krieger

United States District Judge

Case 1:11-cr-00355-MSK Document 43 Filed 10/17/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
#### WILSON GOLD STAMPING MACH. CO. v. WEBB HARDWARE & FURNITURE CO., Ltd.

No. 7489.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Second Circuit.

April 5, 1950.

Eugene J. Coen, Shreveport, for appellant.

D. W. Stewart, Jr., Minden, for appellee.

HARDY, Judge.

This is an action in which plaintiff seeks to collect an amount alleged to be due by defendant for goods sold and delivered. After trial in the City Court of Minden,, Webster Parish, Louisiana, there was judgment in favor of defendant rejecting plaintiff’s demands, from which plaintiff had appealed.

Examination of the transcript discloses it to be so incomplete that we do not feel we can intelligently pass upon the merits of this case. The record contains a mass of exhibits apparently tendered by both plaintiff and defendant, but there is no indication either on the exhibits themselves or in the minutes as to whether any or all of these exhibits were properly offered and received in evidence. The same is true as to-the depositions of two witnesses on behalf of plaintiff. It further appears that although certain oral testimony was taken on trial of the case, the record does not contain either a note of such evidence nor a. statement of facts agreed on, by the parties or made up by the Judge of the lower court..

Under the old rule the appeal in this case would be subject to dismissal, but in the case of Nunez v. Serpas, 198 La. 415, 3 So.2d 673, the Supreme Court held that this-rule has been modified by the provisions of Act No. 234 of 1932, which, in effect, provides that a court shall not dismiss an appeal unless it first allows to the appellant a period of time within which to cure and correct the informalities and irregularities existing in the transcript.

Accordingly the appellant is ordered to complete the record:

(a). By proper official certification identifying the exhibits tendered and received in-, evidence by the respective parties;

• (b). By similar proper showing as to the interrogatories of plaintiff’s witnesses; and,.

*640(c). By the preparation and insertion in the record of a statement of facts agreed on by the parties or made up by the Judge of the lower court as to the testimony of such witnesses as were heard on trial of the case.

Appellant is allowed a period of twenty days from the date this judgment becomes final within which to complete the record in accordance with the above instructions, and, in the event of its failure to comply with this order, the appeal will be dismissed at appellant’s cost.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-7455

SPENCER LAMONT STACEY, Petitioner - Appellant,

v. GENE JOHNSON, Director; B. WATSON, Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (7:09-cv-00317-sgw-mfu)

Submitted: January 19, 2010 Decided: January 27, 2010

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Spencer Lamont Stacey, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Spencer Lamont Stacey seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (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). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district

court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000);

Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Stacey 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 before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated balance sheet, consolidated statement of operations and
consolidated statement of cash flows included in the Company's Form 10-Q for the
period ending May 31, 1997 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-31-1997
<CASH>                                          12,318
<SECURITIES>                                    14,384
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,069
<ALLOWANCES>                                       264
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                32,572
<PP&E>                                           1,999
<DEPRECIATION>                                     816
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  37,098
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,257
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            43
<OTHER-SE>                                      32,352
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    37,098
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 8,529
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,528
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,886
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  29
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,567
<INCOME-TAX>                                       580
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                987
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       987
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.27
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.20
        


</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                     EXHIBIT 6.1

                               STATEMENT DETAILING
                        COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS

FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2005 PER AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS:

Net loss:                     $24,430,000

Weighted Average Number of
   Shares Outstanding
   Calculated as follows:     107,924,713

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                            Weighted Average
Number of Shares   Weight   Number of Shares
----------------   ------   ----------------
<S>                <C>      <C>
   107,238,148     0.2466       26,442,283
   107,341,872     0.0027          294,087
   107,546,514     0.0685        7,366,200
   108,213,181     0.6822       73,822,143
                               -----------
                               107,924,713
</TABLE>

Loss Per Share:                      $0.23

FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2004 PER AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS:

Net loss:                       $8,192,000

Weighted Average Number of
   Shares Outstanding
   Calculated as follows:       96,481,552

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                            Weighted Average
Number of Shares   Weight   Number of Shares
----------------   ------   ----------------
<S>                <C>      <C>
    86,762,216     0.1913      16,593,866
    97,072,716     0.0546       5,304,520
    97,832,826     0.1667      16,305,471
    97,907,826     0.0820       8,025,232
    97,978,039     0.0574       5,621,691
    98,488,239     0.1940      19,105,642
    98,583,255     0.1831      18,046,661
   104,436,915     0.0492       5,136,242
   107,145,282     0.0191       2,049,227
   107,238,148     0.0027         293,000
                               ----------
                               96,481,552
</TABLE>

Loss Per Share:                     $0.08

<PAGE>

FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2003 PER AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS:

Net loss:                      $3,940,000

Weighted Average Number of
   Shares Outstanding
   Calculated as follows:      55,251,364

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                            Weighted Average
Number of Shares   Weight   Number of Shares
----------------   ------   ----------------
<S>                <C>      <C>
   44,488,940      0.2493      11,091,196
   44,557,485      0.2493      11,108,852
   58,164,036      0.2466      11,469,598
   58,830,703      0.0027         161,180
   58,871,380      0.0027         161,291
   85,501,459      0.2082      17,703,654
   86,309,839      0.0192       1,654,422
   86,740,873      0.0219       1,901,170
                               ----------
                               55,251,364
</TABLE>

Loss Per Share:                     $0.07
# BOVIE MEDICAL CORPORATION

EXHIBIT 32.1

Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In  connection  with  the Quarterly Report of Bovie Medical Corporation (the  Company) on Form
10-KSB for the year ended  December  31, 2003 as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof,  I, Andrew  Makrides,  President  and
Chairman of the Board of the  Company,  certify,  pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  that to my knowledge:  (1) the annual report fully
complies with the  requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities  Exchange Act
of 1934; and (2) the information contained in the annual report fairly presents,
in all material respects,  the financial  condition and results of operations of
the Company.

Date:   March 30, 2004

/s/ Andrew Makrides
                                               President, Chief
                                               Executive Officer, Chairman
                                               of the Board and Director

A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.