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

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2724 

To amend section 33(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 657c(a)) 

to clarify that the National Veterans Business Development Corporation 

is a private entity. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 22, 2004

Ms. SNOWE (for herself, Mr. KERRY, and Mr. TALENT) introduced the following bill; which was read twice, considered, read the third time, and 

passed 

A BILL

To amend section 33(a) of the Small Business Act (15 

U.S.C. 657c(a)) to clarify that the National Veterans 

Business Development Corporation is a private entity.

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

3 SECTION 1. NATIONAL VETERANS BUSINESS DEVELOP4 MENT CORPORATION. 

5 Section 33(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 

6 657c(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following: 

7 ‘‘Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Corpora8 tion is a private entity and is not an agency, instrumen-
2

•S 2724 CPS 

1 tality, authority, entity, or establishment of the United 

2 States Government.’’.

Æ
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"NASA Armstrong 2015 Achievements","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"QRkS83YGBK\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/nasa-armstrong-2015-achievements-2\/\">NASA Armstrong 2015 Achievements<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/nasa-armstrong-2015-achievements-2\/embed\/#?secret=QRkS83YGBK\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“NASA Armstrong 2015 Achievements” — NASA\" data-secret=\"QRkS83YGBK\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/ed15-0145-014.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":401}
**EXHIBIT 32**

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q of Vision-Sciences, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period endedDecember 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, Ron Hadani, Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Company, and Yoav M. Cohen, Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

(1)          the Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and

(2)          the information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company.
| Dated: February 14, 2007 | /s/ Ron Hadani          |   |
|--------------------------|-------------------------|--------|
|                     | Ron Hadani              |
|                     | Chief Executive Officer |
|                     |                    |
|                     |                    |
| Dated: February 14, 2007 | /s/ Yoav M. Cohen       |   |
|                     | Yoav M. Cohen           |
|                     | Chief Financial Officer |
|                          |                         |        |  |

 

1

----
#### W. B. Chamy *v.*P. O. Flamer's Admr.

Pleading — Answer not Replied To.

A plaintiff, who fails to controvert the allegations in an answer, setting up by counter-claim that a portion of the land in controversy, and which had been sold him, had been otherwise disposed of before sale to him, cannot complain of a reduction of his judgment to the extent of the value of the deficiency.

APPEAL FROM GRAVES COMMON PLEAS COURT.

June 17, 1869.

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Hardin:

It is sufficiently alleged in the answer in this case, which is made a counter-claim against the plaintff,. as the administrator of Flamers, that although Flamers only had title to 130 acres of the quarter section of 160 acres of land described in the deed from him to the defendant, his vendor A. C. Chamy, having sold off 30 acres to another, said Flamers sold defendant the tract as containing the entire quarter section of 160 acres, at the price of two dolalrs and fifty cents per acre, and took the note in controversy for part of the price and fraudulently concealed from defendant the fact that the thirty acres had been sold off and represented to him that he owned the entire 160 acres. The plaintiff *243having failed to file any reply to this counter-claim controverting the material allegations thereof, it should for the purposes of the action, have been taken as true according to the 153rd section of the Civil Code, and the defendant was entitled to relief thereon, for *$15,*the value of the deficit in the tract at the contract price, with interest to be applied in reduction of the plaintiff’s demand.

*Slayden, for appellant.*

*Anderson, Stubblefield, for appellee.*

The judgment is therefore deemed erroneous, and must be reversed. But on the return of the cause the plaintiff should be allowed to reply to the counter-claim.

Wherefore the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial and for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Beth Ridgeway","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/angela-b-ridgewaynasa-gov\/","title":"Low-Earth Orbit Flight Test of an Inflatable Decelerator (LOFTID) Overview","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"cjcjujhanz\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/general\/low-earth-orbit-flight-test-of-an-inflatable-decelerator-loftid-overview\/\">Low-Earth Orbit Flight Test of an Inflatable Decelerator (LOFTID) Overview<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/general\/low-earth-orbit-flight-test-of-an-inflatable-decelerator-loftid-overview\/embed\/#?secret=cjcjujhanz\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Low-Earth Orbit Flight Test of an Inflatable Decelerator (LOFTID) Overview” — NASA\" data-secret=\"cjcjujhanz\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/03\/loftid_wearth.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":464}
##### 



Exhibit 31.2 CERTIFICATION AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Edward A. Townsend, certify that:  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Local Financial Corporation;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary in
order to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under
which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this quarterly report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash
flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
quarterly 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) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant
and we 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, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known
to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;(b)
    
    [intentionally omitted];(c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions
about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,
as of the end of the period covered by this quarterly report based
on such evaluation; and(d)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants
internal control over 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 and the audit committee of the
registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):  (a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal control over financial reporting
which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants
ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; and(b)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management
or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants
internal controls. Date: May 7, 2004
    /s/ Edward A. TownsendEdward A. TownsendChief Executive Officer
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

                          FRANKLIN FINANCE CORPORATION
                       COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE

Net income for basic income per share is computed by subtracting from the
applicable income the dividend requirements on preferred stock to arrive at
income applicable to common stock and dividing this amount by the weighted
average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                            SIX MONTHS ENDED           THREE MONTHS ENDED
                                                               ------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              JUNE 30,                      JUNE 30,
                                                                       2002             2001           2002         2001
                                                               -------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                                               <C>               <C>             <C>           <C>
INCOME
Net income                                                        $ 1,485,553       $ 1,440,060     $ 813,328     $ 700,999
Less: preferred stock dividend requirements                           900,450           900,450       450,225       450,225
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net income applicable to common stock                             $   585,103       $   539,610     $ 363,103     $ 250,774

SHARES
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding                   22,077            22,077        22,077        22,077

NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE                                       $     26.50       $     24.44     $   16.45     $   11.36
</TABLE>
423 A.2d 1302

#### Commonwealth v. Freeland, Appellant.

Argued June 25, 1979.

Vito F. Canuso, Jr., for appellant; Eric B. Henson, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Before WIEAND, ROBINSON and LOUIK, JJ.*

*

 President Judge Otto P. Robinson of the Court of Common Pleas of Lackawanna County, Pennsylvania, and Judge Maurice Louik of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, are sitting by designation.

Judgment of sentence affirmed.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Nathan Cranford","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nathan-a-cranfordnasa-gov\/","title":"Antarctic Stations","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"xJIr8TJ979\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/mission\/antarctic-stations\/\">Antarctic Stations<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/mission\/antarctic-stations\/embed\/#?secret=xJIr8TJ979\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Antarctic Stations” — NASA\" data-secret=\"xJIr8TJ979\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/mcmurdo.png?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":450}
#### William K. GRAHAM, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Charles H. GREINER, Warden at Sing Sing Correctional Facility, Respondent-Appellee.

Docket No. 04-2084.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Feb. 15, 2005.

*437Paul J. Angioletti, Staten Island, NY, for Petitioner.

Marlene 0. Tuczinski, Assistant Solicitor General, Albany, N.Y. (Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General of the State of New York, Nancy A. Spiegel, Senior Assistant Solicitor General, on the brief, Albany, NY), for Respondent.

PRESENT: JACOBS, CALABRESI, Circuit Judges, and RAKOFF,* District Judge.

*

 The Honorable Jed S. Rakoff, United States District Judge for the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation.

*SUMMARY ORDER*

William K. Graham appeals a March 2, 2004 order of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York (Hurd, /.), denying Graham’s petition for writ of habeas corpus. We assume that the parties are familiar with the facts, the procedural history and the scope of the issues presented on appeal.

Graham argues that the district court committed clear error in rejecting his contention that eyewitness testimony provided by one Edward Love at Graham’s trial was perjured. A federal court may only grant a habeas petition where an adjudication on the merits in a state proceeding “resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d). Under clearly established Supreme Court precedent, the use of perjured testimony violates due process only where: “ ‘the prosecution knew, or should have known, of the perjury,’ and (2) ‘there is any reasonable likelihood that the false testimony could have affected the judgment of the jury.’ ” *Drake v. Portuondo,*321 F.3d 338, 345 (2d Cir.2003) (quoting *United States v. Agurs,*427 U.S. 97, 103, 96 S.Ct. 2392, 49 L.Ed.2d 342 (1976)) (footnote omitted).

Graham cites to several facts that cast doubt on the veracity of Love’s trial testimony. However, the district court found that “it was only after the victim was made aware that Love had been apprehended and had provided information to the police that she altered her version of what had transpired in a manner that proved to be consistent with Love’s statements to the authorities regarding the circumstances surrounding Graham’s attack on the victim.” This finding is amply supported by the evidence adduced during both Graham’s trial and the evidentiary hearing held below, and it firmly corroborates Love’s trial testimony. *See Ortega v. Duncan,*333 F.3d 102, 107 (2d Cir.2003) *438(the district court “must weigh all the evidence” in determining “whether testimony given at trial was in fact truthful”). Under the circumstances, the district court cannot be said to have committed clear error.

For the reasons set forth above, the judgment of the district court is hereby AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AND STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS CONTAINED IN THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE
THREE AND SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          23,647
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   34,600
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     29,632
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                88,201
<PP&E>                                          38,644
<DEPRECIATION>                                  49,557
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 144,445
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           33,877
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           162
<OTHER-SE>                                     108,415
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   144,445
<SALES>                                         65,982
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                65,982
<CGS>                                           42,911
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   42,911
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                26,256
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 451
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,621)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (996)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,625)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,625)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    ($0.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  ($0.10)


</TABLE>