alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2



         Austin, Texas (April 1, 1998) ... TCC Industries, Inc. (NYSE:TEL)
announced today that it had terminated discussions with an acquisition group
that last week offered to acquire the business of one of its subsidiaries,
Paladin Financial, Inc. The acquisition group, consisting of some members of
Paladin's management, had expressed the view that TCC's business plan for the
purchase and sale of conventional, uninsured mortgage loans known as 125 Loan to
Value (125 LTV), was too conservative and wished to pursue a more aggressive
program in the market as a stand-alone company. TCC reported that it would
maintain and expand its original business plan (which involves the purchase,
securitization and sale of traditional, Title I insured mortgages) and would
acquire 125 LTV product only against a pre-arranged, profitable disposition.
Lastly, TCC announced that a few members of the acquisition group are no longer
employed by TCC.


CONTACT: Robert Thomajan, President         
         Walter A. DeRoeck, Chairman                 
         512-708-5000


                                  *** E N D ***
[J-84-2021] [MO: Todd, J.]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

DR. AHLAM KHALIL,

Appellant

v.

GERALD J. WILLIAMS ESQUIRE; BETH 

COLE ESQUIRE; WILLIAMS CUKER

BEREZOFSKY, LLC,

Appellees

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 24 EAP 2021

Appeal from the Judgment of 

Superior Court entered on January 

5, 2021 at No. 2549 EDA 2019, 

affirming in part, reversing in part 

and remanding the Order entered on 

July 12, 2019 in the Court of 

Common Pleas, Philadelphia 

County, Civil Division at No. 0825 

May Term, 2013.

ARGUED: December 8, 2021

CONCURRING OPINION

JUSTICE MUNDY DECIDED: July 20, 2022

I join the result reached by the majority. With that said, I am also aligned with 

Justice Wecht’s view that the rule announced in Muhammad v. Strassburger, McKenna, 

Messer, Shilobod & Gutnick, 587 A.2d 1346 (Pa. 1991), should be disapproved, and that 

the present dispute offers a convenient vehicle to do so. While discouraging litigation 

based on a mere desire to obtain more money the second time around has some appeal, 

as Justice Wecht notes the jurisdictions which have rejected a Muhammad-type rule have 

not been overburdened by those types of lawsuits. More fundamentally, there does not 

seem to be any reason injured clients should be barred from recovery if they can prove 

negligence, damages, and proximate causation, as in any other tort case.
United States Court of Appeals 

for the Fifth Circuit 

No. 19-40832 

Summary Calendar 

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee, 

versus

Juan Carlos Escalera-Huereca, 

Defendant—Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Southern District of Texas 

USDC No. 7:19-CR-842-1 

Before Wiener, Dennis, and Haynes, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Juan Carlos 

Escalera-Huereca has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in 

accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States 

v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Escalera-Huereca has filed a response. 

*

 Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this 

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 

circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. 

United States Court of Appeals 

Fifth Circuit 

FILED 

July 21, 2021 

Lyle W. Cayce 

Clerk 

Case: 19-40832 Document: 00515945991 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/21/2021
No. 19-40832 

2 

We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record 

reflected therein, as well as Escalera-Huereca’s response. We concur with 

counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for 

appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is 

GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and 

the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2. 

Case: 19-40832 Document: 00515945991 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/21/2021
In cybersecurity, 

there should be no 

ifs, ands, or butts!

Don’t let cybersecurity 

take a backseat.
Foreword 

This handbook has been prepared as a procedural guide for compliance testing of net content statements on

packaged goods. Compliance testing of packaged goods is the determination of the conformance of the 

results of the packaging, distribution, and retailing process (the packages) with specific legal requirements 

for net content declarations. This handbook has been primarily developed for use by government officials, 

it also should be useful to commercial and industrial establishments in the areas of packaging, distribution, 

and sale of commodities. 

In conducting compliance testing, the conversion of the values of quantities should be handled with careful 

regard to the implied correspondence between the accuracy of the data and the given number of digits. In

all conversions, the number of significant digits retained should be such that accuracy is neither sacrificed

nor exaggerated. For this 4th edition of Handbook 133 all dimensions for test procedures, devices, or

environments have been rounded to two significant digits (e.g., 2.5 cm to 1.0 in) or to a precision level

applicable to test equipment (e.g., 200 kPa for 25 psi and 35 MPa for 5 000 psi). 

iii
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4012 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 659
108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4012

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 19, 2004

  Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental 
                                Affairs

                             July 22, 2004

               Reported by Ms. Collins, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
    To amend the District of Columbia College Access Act of 1999 to 
  reauthorize for five additional years the public school and private 
     school tuition assistance programs established under the Act.

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

SECTION 1. 5-YEAR REAUTHORIZATION OF TUITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS.

    (a) Public School Program.--Section 3(i) of the District of 
Columbia College Access Act of 1999 (sec. 38-2702(i), D.C. Official 
Code) is amended by striking ``each of the five succeeding fiscal 
years'' and inserting ``each of the 10 succeeding fiscal years''.
    (b) Private School Program.--Section 5(f) of such Act (sec. 38-
2704(f), D.C. Official Code) is amended by striking ``each of the five 
succeeding fiscal years'' and inserting ``each of the 10 succeeding 
fiscal years''.

                                                       Calendar No. 659

108th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 4012

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

    To amend the District of Columbia College Access Act of 1999 to 
  reauthorize for five additional years the public school and private 
     school tuition assistance programs established under the Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             July 22, 2004

                       Reported without amendment
```
••

••
••••••••

MHz 5850 5855 5865 5875 5885 5895 5905 5915 5925 5935

2

3

1 FCC assigned upper 30 MHz of ITS band (5.895-5.925 GHz, B47). 2 MIIT officially regulated the upper 20 MHz (5.905-5.925 GHz). 3 ITS spectrum allocation in Europe is still pending. The EU has adopted technology neutrality in spectrum allocation.

1

Unlicensed C-V2X

Urban rail

ITS non-safety shared with

short-range devices (SRD) ITS safety

ITS safety (conditional

on protection for urban rail)

ITS

Korea, Australia, 

Canada, Brazil,

Singapore
Rel-16 C-V2X cars

••••
•••••
••••



••••••
••

Follow us on:

For more information, visit us at:

qualcomm.com & qualcomm.com/blog

Thank you

Confidential – Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. and/or its affiliated companies – May Contain Trade Secrets

All data and information contained in or disclosed by this document is confidential

and proprietary information of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. and/or its affiliated

companies and all rights therein are expressly reserved. By accepting this material the

recipient agrees that this material and the information contained therein will not be used,

copied, reproduced in whole or in part, nor its contents revealed in any manner to others

without the express written permission of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Nothing in these

materials is an offer to sell any of the components or devices referenced herein.

©2018-2023 Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. and/or its affiliated companies.

All Rights Reserved.

Qualcomm is a trademark or registered trademark of Qualcomm Incorporated.

Other products and brand names may be trademarks or registered trademarks

of their respective owners.

References in this presentation to “Qualcomm” may mean Qualcomm Incorporated,

Qualcomm Technologies, Inc., and/or other subsidiaries or business units within

the Qualcomm corporate structure, as applicable. Qualcomm Incorporated

includes our licensing business, QTL, and the vast majority of our patent portfolio.

Qualcomm Technologies, Inc., a subsidiary of Qualcomm Incorporated, operates,

along with its subsidiaries, substantially all of our engineering, research and

development functions, and substantially all of our products and services businesses,

including our QCT semiconductor business. Snapdragon and Qualcomm branded 

products are products of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. and/or its subsidiaries.
Exhibit 32.1




CERTIFICATION FURNISHED 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 Patriot Scientific Corporation (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended February 28, 2010, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission and to which this Certification is
an exhibit (the “Report”), the undersigned officer of the Company does hereby
certify, pursuant to Rule 13a–14(b) or Rule 15d–14(b) of the Securities and
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of
the United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:




(1)           The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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:
April 9, 2010


/s/ Clifford L. Flowers
              Clifford
      L. Flowers
              Interim Chief Executive
      Officer
              and
      Chief Financial
Officer
#### MONROE v. KING

No. 245P97

Case below: 125 N.C.App. 747

Petition by plaintiff for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 23 July 1997.
HMM Reference NIST Technical Note 2205: Item 27 Garage Door

Item 27 Garage Door – Sealed garage doors with metal flashing along lower frame can reduce risk of garage ignition.

No flashing

on trim Unsealed gap

under door

Window

No windows

Sealed gap

under door

Flashing along

door trim

(illustrated) Damaged vinyl

window trim

Sealed gap 

around door

Flashing along

door trim

(illustrated)

Note: Selected photographs are included to illustrate each HMM hardening item. Additional vulnerabilities or hardening items may be seen in the photographs, but those are highlighted within their specific HMM item.
· Hardening Actions: Add metal flashing at base of framing

for first 6 inches. Enclose bottom of door with metal flashing("C" channel) for 6 inches if door is not metal. Add fireresistant gasketing.

· Applicable Conditions: Wooden door or frame; no gasket· Performance Goals: Prevent ember intrusion and ignition

Installation Cautions 

1/1 

e: A Fire Hazards 1. If gaps are present or door is left open, embers may enter the garage

and ignite combustibles. 

1. Seal flashing to frame. 

1 1
*No.*14,505.

#### Harris *v.*Howe.

Appellate *Court.*— Proceedings *Supplementary to Execution.*— Jurisdiction. —The Appellate Court has exclusive jurisdiction oi a proceeding supplementary to execution, in aid of the collection of a judgment, where the amount in controversy does not exceed one thousand dollars. The fact that it may be necessary for the court to pass upon the validity of *73a transfer of property, where it incidentally arises, is not sufficient to deprive the Appellate Court of jurisdiction.

Filed May 16, 1891.

From the Bartholomew Circuit Court.

*8. Stansifer*and *O. 8. Balter,*for appellant.

*J. G. Orr*and *W. 8. 8ioengel,*for appellee.

Miller, J. —

This was a proceeding supplementary to execution, instituted under section 819, R. S. 1881, in aid of the collection of a judgment.

We are of the opinion that the cause is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Appellate Court. The action is “ for the recovery of money only,” and the amount in controversy is less than one thousand dollars. We do not think that the fact that it may be necessary for the court to pass upon the validity of a transfer of property, where it incidentally arises, is sufficient to deprive the Appellate Court of jurisdiction. *Baker*v. *Groves,*126 Ind. 593; *Parker*v. *Indianapolis Nat’l Bank,*126 Ind. 595.

The clerk of this court is, therefore, directed to transfer this cause to the Appellate Court for final determination.
Motion Granted; Abatement Order filed February 13 , 2018.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 17

- 00907

- CV

____________ IN THE ESTATE OF FOR EST BENNETT SMITH, DECEASED

On Appeal from the Probate Court No

. 4

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 428751

- 401



### ABATEMENT ORDER

On February 6, 2018 , the parties notified this court that they had reached an agreement to settle the issues on appeal, and requested that the appeal be abated for completion of the settlement. The motion is granted. Accordingly, we issue the following order.
The appeal is abated, treated as a closed case, and remove d from this court’s
active docket until April 11, 2018 . The appeal will be reinstated on this court’s active docket at that time, or when the parties file a motion to dismiss the appeal or otherdispositive motion. The court will also consider an appropria te motion to reinstate

the appeal filed by any party, or the court may reinstate the appeal on its own motion.

PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Christopher and Jamison.
MEP	Advisory	Board Meeting Agenda

May	19,	2016

Charleston	Marriott

Topaz	Room

1700	Lockwood	Boulevard;	Charleston,	SC

8:00am	– 9:00am Breakfast Hotel:	Saffire	Restaurant	&	Bar

9:00am	– 9:05am Meeting	Logistics Zara	Brunner,	NIST	MEP

9:05am	– 9:15am Welcome	and	Introductions

• Opening	Remarks

• Board	and	Audience	Introductions

Carroll	Thomas,	Director,	NIST	MEP

Vickie	Wessel,	Chair,	MEP	Advisory	

Board

9:15am	– 9:45am Manufacturing Policies	to	Support	US	

Manufacturing

J.J. Raynor,	Special	Assistant	to	the	

President	for	Economic	Policy,	National	

Economic	Council

9:45am	– 10:30am Director’s	MEP	Updates	 Carroll	Thomas,	Director,	NIST	MEP

10:30am	– 10:45am Break

10:45am	– 12:00pm Recap	and	Review	of	Current MEP	Strategic	Plan	

2014-2017;	Where	we	left	off	December	2014

Vickie	Wessel,	Chair,	MEP	Advisory	

Board

Dave	Cranmer,	Deputy	Director,	NIST	

MEP

12:00pm	– 1:30pm Lunch Hotel:	Saffire	Restaurant &	Bar

1:30pm	– 2:30pm Defining	NIST	Director’s	Charge:	MEP	Learning	

Organization

Carolyn	Cason,	MEP	Advisory	Board

2:30am	– 2:45am Break

2:45pm	- 3:45pm Defining	NIST	Director’s	Charge:	Connecting	User	

Facilities	and	Labs	with	SMMs

Bernadine	Hawes,	MEP	Advisory	Board

3:45pm	– 4:15pm Wrap-Up/Public	Comments Carroll	Thomas,	NIST	MEP

Vickie	Wessel,	Chair,	MEP	Advisory	

Board
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT

RODNEY DEAN MANLEY, ) DOC #R53349, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D17-4908 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed August 16, 2019. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; Michael F. Andrews, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and J. Rafael Rodríguez, Special Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kristen L. Davenport, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

SILBERMAN, SALARIO, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.
<Page>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 31.01

                     RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATIONS

I, Vinay Mendiratta, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of ML Futures Investments L.P.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does 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 covered by 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 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 and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-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, including its
    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 this report 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;

    c) 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 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 registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent function):

    a) All significant deficiencies and material weakness in the design or
    operation of internal controls 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 control
    over financial reporting.

Date: November 15, 2004
-----------------------

By /s/ VINAY MENDIRATTA
   --------------------
Vinay Mendiratta
Managing Director and Chief Operating Officer
- Alternative Strategies and Quantitative Advisers Divisions
(Principal Executive Officer)

                                       16
EX-4.2 LEGEND FOR CERTIFICATES



 






Exhibit 4.2




WESTERN RESERVE BANCORP, INC.

FORM 10-QSB

September 30, 2005



Legend to be Placed on Certificates Representing Shares Issued in the Offering:



The shares represented by this certificate have not been registered under the Securities Act of
1933 (the “Act”) but have been sold pursuant to an exemption from the registration provisions of
the Act under Section 3(a)(11) of that Act and Rule 147 promulgated thereunder. Such shares may
not be resold outside the State of Ohio for nine (9) months after issuance.
February 2002 

Moisture Loss: What is it? How much is allowed? 

By: Tom Coleman 

Moisture loss in prepackaged products contributes to the loss of weight or volume after 

packaging. Loss of weight may result from solvent evaporation, not just the loss of 

water. Packaged products may lose or gain moisture. The amount of loss or gain depends 

on many factors: the nature of the product; packaging material; length of time the 

product is in distribution; environmental conditions, and many other combinations of 

factors. Moisture loss may occur even when manufacturers follow "all the rules.” 

What do we allow? NIST Handbook 133 provides “moisture allowances” for some 

meat and poultry products, flour, and dry pet food. Dry pet food means all extruded dog 

and cat foods and baked “treat” products packaged in paper bags and/or cardboard boxes 

with a moisture content of 13 percent or less at the time of pack. 

When testing packages of meat and poultry that bears the USDA Seal of Inspection using 

“used dry tare” and a Category A inspection, there is no moisture allowance. When 

testing meat and poultry from any USDA plant that bears the USDA seal of inspection 

using “wet tare” and a Category A inspection, use the following guideline. 

• For packages of fresh poultry, the moisture allowance is 3 percent of the labeled net 

weight. For net weight determinations only, fresh poultry is defined as poultry above 

3 °C (26 °F). 

• For packages of franks or hotdogs, the moisture allowance is 2.5 percent of the labeled 

net weight. 

• For packages of bacon, fresh sausage, and luncheon meats, there is no moisture 

allowance if there is no free-flowing liquid or absorbent material in contact with the 

product and the package is cleaned of clinging material. Luncheon meats are any cooked 

sausage product, loaves, jellied products, cured products, and any sliced sandwich style 

meat. This does not include whole hams, briskets, roasts, turkeys, or chickens requiring 

further preparation to be made into ready-to-eat sliced product. When there is no freeflowing liquid inside the package and there are no absorbent materials in contact with the 

product, wet tare and used dry tare are equivalent. 

• When there is free flowing liquid or absorbent packaging materials in contact with the 

product all free liquid is part of the wet tare.
APPENDIX OF SUPPORTING COUNSEL DECLARATIONS 

EXHIBIT 

TAB 

FIRM 

A 

Freed Kanner London & Millen 

B Susman Godfrey 

C Hausfeld LLP 

D Bottini & Bottini, Inc. 

E Burns Charest 

F Clifford Law Offices 

G Glancy Prongay 

H Phillips Erlewine 

I Ahdoot & Wolfson, PC 

J Consumer Protection Legal, LLC 

K Scott+Scott Attorneys at Law LLP 

L Foote, Mielke, Chavez & O’Neil, LLC. 

M Erik H. Langeland P.C. 

N Cafferty Clobes Meriwether & Sprengel LLP 

O Sauder Schelkopf LLP 

P Baird Law Firm 

Q Stephan Zouras, LLP 

R Tostrud Law Group, P.C. 

S Wood Law Firm, LLC 

T Gordon Law Offices LLC 

U Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy, LLP 

V DiCello Levitt

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-17 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:3748
W Bleichmar Fonti 

X Chimicles Schwartz Kriner & Donaldson-Smith LLP 

Y Girard Sharp LLP 

Z Onderlaw LLC 

AA Baer Law 

BB Lawrence Kamin 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-17 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:3749