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

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1202 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1202

   To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to prohibit an 
 authorized committee of a winning candidate for election for Federal 
 office which received a personal loan from the candidate from making 
any repayment on the loan after the date on which the candidate begins 
                        serving in such office.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 27, 2007

 Mr. English of Pennsylvania (for himself, Ms. Norton, and Mr. Carter) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                          House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to prohibit an 
 authorized committee of a winning candidate for election for Federal 
 office which received a personal loan from the candidate from making 
any repayment on the loan after the date on which the candidate begins 
                        serving in such office.

    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 ``Personal Accountability in Campaign 
Committees Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITING REPAYMENT OF CANDIDATE PERSONAL LOANS AFTER DATE ON 
              WHICH CANDIDATE BEGINS SERVING IN ELECTED OFFICE.

    Section 315 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 
441a) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(k) Limitations on Repayment of Personal Loans Made by Candidate 
to Committee.--An authorized committee of a winning candidate for an 
election for Federal office occurring after December 2007 which 
received a personal loan from the candidate may not make any repayment 
with respect to such loan on or after the date on which the candidate 
begins serving in the office.''.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 15.1****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the RegistrationStatement on Form F-3 (File No. 333-13802) andRegistration Statements on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-06850,333-11384, 333-12326, 333-13224, 333-13330, 333-13494,333-105348, and 333-108869) pertaining to the Executive ShareOption Scheme, the 1997 Share Option Scheme, as amended,the 1997 Director Share Option Scheme and the 1999 EmployeeStock Purchase Plan of IONA Technologies PLC, the 1997 StockPlan of Genesis Development Corporation, the Stock Option Planof Object-Oriented Concepts, Inc. and the 1999 Stock Option Planof Netfish Technologies, Inc., of our report dated May 11,2005, with respect to the Consolidated Financial Statements ofIONA Technologies PLC included in the Annual Report(Form 20-F) for the year ended December 31, 2004./s/ Ernst & YoungErnst & YoungDublin, IrelandMay 16, 2005
#### Darl D. ALT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. State of WEST VIRGINIA, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 00-7142.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 15, 2000.

Decided Jan. 4, 2001.

Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Dari D. Alt appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2000) complaint. Alt also seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp.2000) for failure to exhaust state remedies. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. *See Alt v. West Virginia,*No. CA-00-592 (S.D.W.Va. Aug. 8, 2000).

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.

*AFFIRMED.*
#### Gunter & Munson v. Austin College.

(No. 1266, R. Book No. 4, p. 206.)

Appeal from Grayson County.

November 4, 1882.

Opinion by

Willson, J.

§ 248. *Ratification of an unauthorized act of a third party*binding, *when.*It is a-well settled doctrine that the ratification of an unauthorized act must, in order to bind the party against whom it is set up, be made with a full knowledge of all the material facts; and if the material facts be unknown to such party, there is no ratification. [Com. Bank v. Jones, 18 Tex. 811; Reese v. Medlock, 27 Tex. 120; Story’s Agency, sec. 251a.]

Reversed and remanded.
STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF NET LOSS PER SHARE


                                              Year Ended          Year Ended
                                           December 31, 1998   December 31, 1997
                                           -----------------   -----------------

        Net loss                             ($  525,499)        ($  3,643,125)
                                              ==========          ============

Basic and diluted net loss per share         ($     0.11)        ($       1.59)
                                              ==========          ============

Weighted average number of common shares
 outstanding                                   4,895,394             2,289,623
                                              ==========          ============


The Company  reports  earnings  (loss) per share in accordance with Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 128, Earnings per Share and Securities
and Exchange Commission (SEC) Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 98 (SAB 98).

Basic loss per share was determined by dividing net loss by the weighted average
common shares outstanding during the period.  Diluted loss per share is the same
as basic loss per share as the effects of the Company's  potential  common stock
are  antidilutive.  During the period  preceding  the Company's  initial  public
offering,  the  Company  issued  185,000  shares of common  stock that have been
treated as "nominal  issuances" in accordance  with SAB 98 in the calculation of
net loss per share.  Basic and diluted loss per share do not include options and
warrants  to purchase  2,323,333  shares of common  stock in 1998 and  2,303,333
shares of common stock in 1997 because the effects are antidilutive.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>                      THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL
                              INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE FINANCIAL
                              STATEMENTS OF HEMASURE INC., FOR THE THREE MONTHS
                              ENDED JUNE 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
                              ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                          1000
<CURRENCY>                            U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                                   <C>

<PERIOD-TYPE>                         6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                     DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                        JUN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                       1
<CASH>                                1,782
<SECURITIES>                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                         0
<ALLOWANCES>                          0
<INVENTORY>                           283
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                      2,427
<PP&E>                                3,099
<DEPRECIATION>                        1,654
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                        3,904
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                 2,603
<BONDS>                               0
<COMMON>                              90
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                 0
<PREFERRED>                           0
<OTHER-SE>                            969
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>          3,904
<SALES>                               25
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                      25
<CGS>                                 657
<TOTAL-COSTS>                         657
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                      5,730
<LOSS-PROVISION>                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                    (50)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                       (6,292)
<INCOME-TAX>                          0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                   (6,292)
<DISCONTINUED>                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                       0
<CHANGES>                             0
<NET-INCOME>                          (6,292)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                         (0.70)
<EPS-DILUTED>                         0
        

</TABLE>
News United States Air Force
 Assistance program provides GS employees counseling, morePublished April 29, 2015
                        
                        By Joanne Perkins
                        
                        
                        Kirtland Air Force Base Public Affairs
                **KIRTLAND AIR FORCE BASE, N.M. (AFNS) --**
                Personal and family problems can diminish a person's happiness, health and ability to be their best at home or at work. With help from the Employee Assistance Program, employees of authorized federal agencies can resolve these matters and become happier, healthier and more effective.
According to Ed Thomas, an EAP field consultant, "Working at a military installation can involve stressors that are not present in off-base workplaces.
"When an individual's work is the security and defense of our nation, that increases the amount of daily stress for that person," he said.
These stressors can often be compounded because employees are reluctant to visit their agency's human resource department.
"They are concerned that negative information might be included in their employee file," he said. "We assure them that our contact is confidential. Our duty to report is only in the case of harming oneself or matters of national security. Our counseling sessions are solution focused, and either the supervisor or employee can make contact with us."
Thomas said GS employees and their immediate family members are entitled to six counseling sessions for any issue causing stress in their life that may impact their work performance. Counseling beyond the six free sessions can include accessing the nationwide network of more than 17,000 affiliates to serve civilian employees, and often engages the employee's behavioral health insurance benefits. 
"Staff members are experts in behavioral health and work-related issues," Thomas said. "When we need to engage financial or legal help for an employee, we use the services of these professionals, such as attorneys and financial advisors."
Available financial services include family and college budgeting, buying or leasing a vehicle, debt consolidation, savings and investment strategies, buying a home and retirement planning.
In addition to providing help on an individual basis, covered agencies are entitled to four one-hour presentations per year. 
"We have 50 presentations available on topics such as conflict resolution, balancing work and life, time and stress management and civility in the workplace," he said. 
Ultimately, EAP is about empowering employees to do their best on the job.
"Our mission is to address any stress in a person's life that affects their work performance," Thomas said. "We want people to be happy in their job and we are here to help make that happen."
For more information on the EAP, call (800) 222-0364 or visit the website.Employee Assistance Program 



EAP 



counseling 



stress 



Kirtland AFB 



AFMC 



AF family
422 A.2d 1170

#### In the Interest of Clark In the Interest of Sumner App. of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

(No. 2300).

(No. 2301).

Argued June 6, 1979.

Nancy Wasser, for appellants; Karl Baker, for Clark, appellee; Melvin B. Goldstein, for Sumner, appellee.

Before PRICE, DOWLING and GATES, JJ.*

*

 President Judge G. Thomas Gates of the Court of Common Pleas of Lebanon County, Pennsylvania, and Judge John C. Dowling of the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County, Pennsylvania, are sitting by designation.

Order affirmed.
EXHIBIT 99.1

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

I,
Joseph Rubinfeld, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of SuperGen, Inc.
on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
that information contained in such Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of SuperGen, Inc.

| |  | By:    |  | /s/JOSEPH RUBINFELD                  
| |  | ------ |  | -------------------------------------
| |  | Name:  |  | Joseph Rubinfeld                     
| |  | Title: |  | President and Chief Executive Officer

I,
Edward Jacobs, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of SuperGen, Inc. on
Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that
information contained in such Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of SuperGen, Inc.

| |  | By:    |  | /s/EDWARD JACOBS                                  
| |  | ------ |  | --------------------------------------------------
| |  | Name:  |  | Edward Jacobs                                     
| |  | Title: |  | Chief Business Officer and Chief Financial Officer

---

QuickLinks
News United States Air Force
 US, South Korean forces integrate at Daegu for Buddy Wing trainingPublished Aug. 17, 2016
                        
                        By Senior Airman Dillian Bamman
                        
                        
                        51st Fighter Wing Public Affairs
                **DAEGU AIR BASE, South Korea (AFNS) --**
                Fighter squadrons across the Korean Peninsula routinely participate in Buddy Wings to enhance the interoperability of U.S. and South Korean air forces.For Buddy Wing 16-7, F-16 Fighting Falcon pilots from the 36th Fighter Squadron traveled to Daegu Air Base to train with F-15K Slam Eagle pilots of the South Korean’s 11th Fighter Wing from Aug. 8-12.“It was a great opportunity to practice combined training with the 36th Fighter Squadron,” said South Korean Capt. Chon Hun Min, a 11th FW F-15K pilot. “It was also a great experience to be able to train between the F-15K and F-16 heterogeneously.”The Buddy Wing exercise provided an opportunity to bring different cultures together to practice the planning and execution of flying training missions.“There were some differences in the capabilities of the F-15s and F-16s that we had to work through, because we tactically employ our weapon systems differently,” said Capt. Ryan Pebler, a 36th FS pilot. “Figuring out the differences there and how we can operate together is one thing we really honed in on.”Now that the pilots of Buddy Wing 16-7 have integrated, formed bonds and evolved throughout the exercise, they look to the future for Red Flag-Alaska.Red Flag is a Pacific Air Forces exercise that provides joint offensive counter-air, interdiction, close air support and large force employment training in a simulated combat environment.“Flying with them and getting to know them on a personal level and a tactical level will definitely help us integrate more as we get down there,” Pebler said. “We know them by name now, and we can work together without the bubble we might’ve had before. I definitely think that will help us be successful at Red Flag.”South Korea 



f-16 



red flag 



training 



Buddy Wing
<PAGE>
                                                                 Exhibit 11.1

                         C-CUBE MICROSYSTEMS INC.
                                     
                 COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE
         Quarter and Six Months Ended June 30, 1997 and 1996
               (in thousands, except per share amounts)


                                  Quarter Ended            Six Months Ended
                                     June 30,                   June 30,
                              ----------------------     --------------------
                                 1997         1996          1997       1996
                              ---------    ---------     --------    --------
Net income                    $   7,684    $  13,846     $ 23,079    $ 27,427
                              =========    =========     ========    ========
Weighted average common 
   shares outstanding            36,430       33,072       36,323      32,906
Common share equivalents 
   related to stock options       1,698        2,625        1,713       2,963
                              ---------    ---------     --------    --------
Weighted average common and 
   equivalent shares             38,128       35,697       38,036      35,869
                              =========    =========     ========    ========
Net income per share              $0.20        $0.39        $0.61       $0.76
                              =========    =========     ========    ========
**Exhibit 31.2****Rule 13a-14 Certification**I, Frank P. Vaughan, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of The Cronos Group (the “Registrant”);2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and have:(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe Registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; and(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented 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(c) disclosed in this report any change in the Registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the Registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the Registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.5. The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Registrant’s auditors and the AuditCommittee of Registrant’s Board of Directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrols over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report information; and(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date:November 13, 2006/s/ FRANK P. VAUGHAN
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from RCPI Trust's
Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1999 and RCPI Trust's Statement of Operations
for the quarter ended September 30, 1999 and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          36,097
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,412
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               164,188
<PP&E>                                         902,245
<DEPRECIATION>                                  60,750
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,052,192
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           33,223
<BONDS>                                        702,387
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     316,582
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,052,192
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                61,164
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                36,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              18,995
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,169
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,169
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,169
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
#### Daniel C. EVANS, Appellant v. DAVIS MEMORIAL GOODWILL INDUSTRIES, INC., Appellee.

No. 00-7144.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

Jan. 18, 2001.

Before SENTELLE, KAREN LECRAFT HENDERSON, and ROGERS, Circuit Judges.

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the briefs filed by the parties. The court has determined that the issues presented occasion no need for an opinion. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 36; D.C.Cir. Rule 36(b). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed May 8, 2000, which granted summary judgment in part and dismissed with prejudice the claim that Evans’ employment was terminated by appellee Davis Memorial Goodwill Industries, Inc. in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., be affirmed substantially for the reasons stated in the memorandum opinion accompanying that order.

The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.