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

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1371 

To amend the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 to provide 

producers on a farm with greater flexibility in selecting the crops to 

be planted on the base acres of the farm. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 7, 2007 

Ms. BALDWIN (for herself, Mr. LAHOOD, Mr. PENCE, and Mr. WALZ of Minnesota) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To amend the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act 

of 2002 to provide producers on a farm with greater 

flexibility in selecting the crops to be planted on the 

base acres of the farm. 

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 ‘‘Farming Flexibility 

5 Act of 2007’’. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
2 

•HR 1371 IH

1 SEC. 2. PRODUCTION OF FRUITS AND VEGETABLES FOR 

2 PROCESSING ON COVERED COMMODITY BASE 

3 ACRES. 

4 Section 1101 of the Farm Security and Rural Invest5 ment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 7911) is amended by adding 

6 at the end the following new subsection: 

7 ‘‘(i) PRODUCTION OF FRUITS OR VEGETABLES FOR

8 PROCESSING.— 

9 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraphs (2) 

10 and (3), producers on a farm, with the consent of 

11 the owner and other producers on the farm, may re12 duce the base acres for any covered commodity for 

13 the farm if the reduced acres are used for the plant14 ing and production of fruits or vegetables for proc15 essing. 

16 ‘‘(2) REVERSION TO COVERED COMMODITY

17 BASE ACRES.—Any reduced acres of a farm devoted 

18 to the planting and production of fruits or vegeta19 bles during a crop year under paragraph (1) shall be 

20 included in base acres for the covered commodity for 

21 the subsequent crop year, unless the producers on 

22 the farm make the election described in paragraph 

23 (1) for the subsequent crop year. 

24 ‘‘(3) RECALCULATION OF BASE ACRES.— 

25 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subpara26 graph (B), if the Secretary recalculates base 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
3 

•HR 1371 IH

1 acres for a farm, the planting and production of 

2 fruits or vegetables for processing under para3 graph (1) shall be considered to be the same as 

4 the planting, prevented planting, or production 

5 of the covered commodity. 

6 ‘‘(B) AUTHORITY.—Nothing in this sub7 section provides authority for the Secretary to 

8 recalculate base acres for a farm.’’. 

Æ 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1503 

AN ACT 

To amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater 

Study and Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary of 

the Interior to participate in the Avra/Black Wash Reclamation and Riparian Restoration Project. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 1503 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Avra/Black Wash Rec3 lamation and Riparian Restoration Project’’. 

4 SEC. 2. PROJECT AUTHORIZATION. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Reclamation Wastewater and 

6 Groundwater Study and Facilities Act (Public Law 102– 

7 575, title XVI; 43 U.S.C. 390h et seq.) is amended by 

8 adding at the end the following: 

9 ‘‘SEC. 16ll. AVRA/BLACK WASH RECLAMATION AND RI10 PARIAN RESTORATION PROJECT, PIMA 

11 COUNTY, ARIZONA. 

12 ‘‘(a) AUTHORIZATION.—The Secretary, in coopera13 tion with Pima County, Arizona, may participate in the 

14 planning, design, and construction of water recycling fa15 cilities and to enhance and restore riparian habitat in the 

16 Black Wash Sonoran Desert ecosystem in Avra Valley 

17 west of the metropolitan Pima County area. 

18 ‘‘(b) COST SHARING.—The Federal share of the cost 

19 of the project described in subsection (a) shall not exceed 

20 25 percent of the cost of the project. 

21 ‘‘(c) LIMITATION.—Federal funds provided under 

22 this section shall not be used for operation or maintenance 

23 of the project described in subsection (a). 

24 ‘‘(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There 

25 is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section 

26 $14,000,000. 
3 

•HR 1503 EH

1 ‘‘(e) USE OF FUNDS.—Federal funds provided under 

2 this section shall only be used for the design, planning 

3 and construction of water-related infrastructure.’’. 

4 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

5 for Public Law 102–575 is amended by inserting after the 

6 last item relating to title XVI the following: 

‘‘Sec. 16ll. Avra/Black Wash Reclamation and Riparian Restoration Project, 

Pima County, Arizona.’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives July 23, 2007. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 
110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1503 

AN ACT 

To amend the Reclamation Wastewater and 

Restoration Project. the Avra/Black Wash Reclamation and Riparian ize the Secretary of the Interior to participate in Groundwater Study and Facilities Act to author-
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1

                             McLEODUSA INCORPORATED

                      COMPUTATION OF LOSS PER COMMON SHARE
                  (AMOUNTS IN MILLIONS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                             Three Months Ended     Six Months Ended
                                                                  June 30,              June 30,
                                                            --------------------  --------------------
                                                               2001       2000       2001       2000
                                                             -------    -------    -------    -------
<S>                                                         <C>        <C>        <C>        <C>
Computation of weighted average number of
 common shares outstanding:
Common shares, Class A, outstanding at the
 beginning of the period..................................     610.4      575.5      606.6      472.8
Common shares, Class B, outstanding at the
 beginning of the period..................................       ---        ---        ---        ---
Weighted average number of shares issued
 during the period........................................       6.8        3.1        7.2       56.3
                                                             -------    -------    -------    -------
Weighted average number of common shares..................     617.2      578.6      613.8      529.1
                                                             =======    =======    =======    =======
Net loss..................................................   $(145.3)   $(139.3)   $(332.0)   $(211.4)
                                                             =======    =======    =======    =======
Loss per common share.....................................   $ (0.24)   $ (0.24)   $ (0.54)   $ (0.40)
                                                             =======    =======    =======    =======
</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 93 (Thursday, June 8, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H5735]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

AUTHORIZING THE CLERK TO MAKE CORRECTIONS IN ENGROSSMENT OF H.R. 1561, 
                AMERICAN OVERSEAS INTERESTS ACT OF 1995

  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that in the 
engrossment of the bill, H.R. 1561, the Clerk be authorized to correct 
section numbers, cross references, punctuation, and indentation, and to 
make any other technical and conforming changes necessary to reflect 
the actions of the House.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Riggs). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.

                          ____________________
```
#### Michael SMITH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D08-4711.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Dec. 22, 2010.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Tom Wm. Odom, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Sue-Ellen Kenny, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

*Affirmed. See Lewek v. State,*702 So.2d 527 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997).

GROSS, C.J., STEVENSON and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.
#### STATE ex rel. Norris MOTEN v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 2010-KH-0877.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 8, 2011.

In re Moten, Norris; —Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. B, No. 320-387; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2010-K-0189.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; *State ex rel Glover v. State,*93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189. Cf. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4(D).
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 23

- 0545 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v. CHARLES GALEN LANE,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time to produce transcripts on appeal, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Court Reporter Robin Lee is granted an extension of time to and including January 16 , 202 4, within which to prepare, file, and serve the transcripts requested on appeal. The Clerk shall serve a copy of this Order upon the district court and the court reporter.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

December 19 2023

12/19/2023

Case Number: DA 23-0545
#### Phillips *v.*Cumberland Island Club.

This case being for decision by a full bench of six Justices who are equally divided- in opinion, Russell, C. J., and Gilbert and Hines, JJ-, being in favor of affirming the judgment of the trial court, and Beck, P. J., and Atkinson and Hill, JJ., being in favor of a reversal, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed by operation of law.

No. 6362.

September 18, 1928.

Petition for injunction. Before Judge J. H. Thomas. Glynn superior court. October 20, 1927.

*B. D. Mender*and *J. T.*Colson, for plaintiff.

Dorsey, *Shelton & Dorsey*and *F. M.*Scarlett, for defendant.
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14(A) OR 15D-14(A) OF THE**

**SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS ADOPTED**

**PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY**

**ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Alan Baratz, certify that: 

 

1.    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Versata, Inc.; 

 

2.    Based on my knowledge, this reportdoes 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 coveredby this report; 

 

3.    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

 

4.    The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining 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 and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, includingits consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

 

(b)    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

 

(c)    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

 

5.    The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors andthe 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 overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

 

(b)    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                      10,386,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,457,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    730,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            12,846,000
<PP&E>                                      79,310,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              22,344,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              73,731,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       32,620,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       100,000
<OTHER-SE>                                (35,461,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                73,731,000
<SALES>                                     34,000,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            34,030,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               34,764,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               366,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           5,098,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (6,198,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (6,198,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (6,198,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.62)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        


</TABLE>
#### Carstarvos WOODS Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 5D10-3672.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Jan. 28, 2011.

Carstarvos Woods, Ft. Lauderdale, pro se.

No Appearance for Appellee.

*ON ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE*

PER CURIAM.

This Court issued a *Spencer*
      *1*
      **show cause order directing the Appellant, Carstarvos Woods, to demonstrate why he should not be barred from filing further pro se challenges to his convictions and sentences in this case. We did so after affirming the denial of Woods’ successive pro se motion *381for postconviction relief — his sixth such motion since he was convicted eighteen years ago and his second since he was barred from further pro se filings by the trial court. We find Woods’ response to our show cause order to be unpersuasive and conclude he is abusing the judicial process.

Therefore, we now prohibit Woods from filing with this Court any more pro se pleadings concerning Hernando County, Fifth Judicial Circuit Court, case numbers 91-001-CF and 91-8B0-CF. The Clerk of this Court is directed not to accept any further pro se filings from Woods concerning these cases. Any additional pleadings or motions in this case will be summarily rejected by the Clerk, unless they are filed by a member in good standing with The Florida Bar. *See Johnson v. State,*652 So.2d 980, 980 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (prohibiting petitioner from filing further pro se pleadings after thirteen challenges to conviction and sentence); *Isley v. State,*652 So.2d 409, 411 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (“Enough is enough.”). The Clerk is further directed to forward a certified copy of this opinion to the appropriate institution for consideration of disciplinary procedures. *See*§ 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2010); *Simpkins v. State,*909 So.2d 427, 428 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005).

GRIFFIN, EVANDER and JACOBUS, JJ., concur.

. *State v. Spencer,*751 So.2d 47 (Fla.1999).
#### Kevin Jeron WOODARD, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D10-6748.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Oct. 20, 2011.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Robert S. Friedman, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Therese A. Savona, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. *See State v. Brockman,*827 So.2d 299, 303 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002).

BENTON, C.J., HAWKES, and ROWE, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 32.1**

**Written StatementPursuant To18 U.S.C. Section 1350**

The undersigned,Steven L. Muellner, the Chief Executive Officer of Meade Instruments Corp. (the“Company”), pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, hereby certifies that:

           (i)  the Form 10-K for the fiscal yearended February 28, 2006 of the Company (the “Report”) fully complies withthe requirements of section 13(a) and 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

         (ii)  the information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

Date: June1, 2007
| By:                 | /s/ STEVEN L.  MUELLNER |   |
|---------------------|-------------------------|--------|
| *President and CEO* |

 

----
#### STATE of Louisiana v. John GILMORE.

No. 2012-KK-0509.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 13, 2012.

In re Gilmore, John; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. K, No. 502-412; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-K-0028.

Denied.
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.27




                                 March 5, 2003


Stan Tusman


Dear Stan:

         The full year 2002 results ended with a pre-tax profit of $4,109,882.
Unfortunately, this was well below the lowest level where bonus is paid in our
2002 bonus program. I have adjusted the bonus levels as follows for 2003 in
accordance with our new plans.

         The bonus period will be the fiscal months of January 2003 through
December 2003. You must be an employee of Bakers Footwear Group for the full
year to earn your bonus. Your maximum bonus will be 100% of your cumulative
salary for this time period. Your bonus will be earned based on the pre-tax
profit (adding back depreciation and bonus) as follows:

<Table>
<S>       <C>                                                                    <C>
   10%    of your cumulative salary if the company achieves a pre-tax profit of   $4,000,000
   20%    of your cumulative salary if the company achieves a pre-tax profit of   $4,250,000
   30%    of your cumulative salary if the company achieves a pre-tax profit of   $4,500,000
   40%    of your cumulative salary if the company achieves a pre-tax profit of   $5,000,000
   50%    of your cumulative salary if the company achieves a pre-tax profit of   $5,500,000
 66.7%    of your cumulative salary if the company achieves a pre-tax profit of   $7,500,000
 83.3%    of your cumulative salary if the company achieves a pre-tax profit of   $8,500,000
  100%    of your cumulative salary if the company achieves a pre-tax profit of   $9,500,000
</Table>

         Needless to say, we are looking for a strong rebound in profits and
bonus for everyone. Thank you for all your hard work and commitment.


                                                    Sincerely,



                                                    Peter Edison


ss
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








In connection with the Annual Report of Silverleaf Resorts, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert E. Mead, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





|    |                                                                                                                      
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(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 16, 2011/s/ ROBERT E. MEADRobert E. MeadChairman of the Board,Chief Executive Officer,and President








A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Silverleaf Resorts, Inc. and will be retained by Silverleaf Resorts, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.