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

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1474 

To allow States to elect to observe year-round daylight saving time, and 

for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 8, 2023 

Mr. ROGERS of Alabama introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To allow States to elect to observe year-round daylight saving 

time, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. OPTIONAL YEAR-LONG APPLICATION OF DAY4 LIGHT SAVING TIME. 

5 Section 3(a) of the Uniform Time Act of 1966 (15 

6 U.S.C. 260a) is amended— 

7 (1) by inserting ‘‘or may by law apply the ad8 vancement of time described in this section for the 

9 duration of the year,’’ after ‘‘may by law exempt 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 1474 IH

1 itself from the provisions of this subsection providing 

2 for the advancement of time,’’; 

3 (2) by striking ‘‘the standard time otherwise 

4 applicable during that period’’ and inserting ‘‘the 

5 same standard time’’; 

6 (3) by striking ‘‘may by law exempt either the 

7 entire State as provided in (1) or’’ and inserting ‘‘, 

8 by law, may apply either standard time provided for 

9 in paragraph (1) to the entire State,’’; and 

10 (4) by inserting ‘‘, or may apply the advance11 ment of time for the duration of the year to the en12 tire area of the State lying within any time zone’’ 

13 before the period at the end. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Quarterly Report of Bay View Capital Corporation
(the Company) on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 (the
Report), I, John Okubo, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of
my knowledge:  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company for the periods presented therein. Date: May 10, 2005 /s/ John OkuboJohn Okubo
Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Bay View Capital Corporation and will be retained by Bay View
Capital Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request. 37
Order entered July 25, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 09
- 01377
- CV
DARLENE C. BALISTRERI
- AMRHEIN, Appellant
V. AHI & INSPECTOR AARO N D. MILLER, ET AL., Appellee s On Appeal from the 296th Judicial District Cour t

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 296
- 01145
- 2008



### O RDER The Court has before it appellants’ July 11, 2013 “motion for reconsideration and good cause reasons of July 1, 2013 order.” The Court DENIES the motion.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTIC E
**Exhibit 21.01**

**LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF KANA SOFTWARE, INC.**

BROADBASE SOFTWARE, INC. (UNITED STATES) 

eVERGANCE PARTNERS LLC (UNITED STATES) 

eVERGANCE UK LIMITED (UNITED KINGDOM)

FOUNDATION CV (NETHERLANDS, RESIDENT IN BARBADOS) 

KANACOMMUNICATIONS EUROPE LTD (UNITED KINGDOM) 

KANA COMMUNICATIONS PTY LTD. (AUSTRALIA) 

KANA SOFTWARE AUSTRIA GmbH (AUSTRIA) 

KANA SOFTWARE B.V. (NETHERLANDS) 

KANA SOFTWARE HONG KONG LIMITED (HONG KONG) 

KANA SOFTWARE BVBA (BELGIUM)

KANA SOFTWARE CANADA LTD. (CANADA) 

KANA SOFTWARE GmbH(GERMANY) 

KANA SOFTWARE INDIA (INDIA) 

KANA SOFTWAREINTERNATIONAL LTD. (CAYMAN ISLANDS) 

KANA SOFTWARE IRELAND LTD. (IRELAND) 

KANA SOFTWARE KK (JAPAN) 

KANA SOFTWARE LTD. (UNITED KINGDOM) 

KANA SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGY, INC. (UNITED STATES) 

SILKNET SOFTWARE (UK) LIMITED (UNITED KINGDOM)
PLANT DIVISION

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

NORTH

SH.NO. OF DWG.

PLANT DIVISION

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

NORTH

DP#

APPROVED BY SPONSOR FIRE PROTECTION SVS. O.H. & S. DIV. PLANNING & ENGR. OFF. PROJECT ENGR DRAWN BY DATE PROJECT/W.O. DESIGN PROJ. #

REVISION DESCRIPTION BY DATE

DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE 226-372

BUILDING 226 - ROOM A122 HVAC TESTING LAB

MECHANICAL SYSTEM DIAGRAMS

GG 12.17.2018 5597 N/A 1 1

M-12

4' 2' 0' 4' 8' 1/4"=1'-0"

MEP CONSULTANTS

20251 Century Blvd #125

germantown, md 20874

p: 877-871-4229

F: 301-560-6336

jford@cfrengineering.com

PROJECT #12074

MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANT:

KEY PLAN

AREA OF WORK

BLDG 226

1. SEE DETAILS FOR ADDITIONAL PIPING SPECIALTIES REQUIRED AT EQUIPMENT.

GENERAL NOTES:

0 ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION 09/06/13

1 PRE-BID CLARIFICATION 11/08/13

2

371 371

1

371 371

D

3

D

2D

1

D

4 D

5

D

6

D

7 D

8

AHU

1

AHU

2

OAU

1

D

9

VAV

1

VAV

2

ZS

1

ZS

2

ZS

3

ZS

4

D

11

D

10 D

14

EF2

VAV

3

VAV

4

D

13

EF

1 D

12 50

86

452 51

49

85

83 84

327

328

328

336

336

77

7

62

405

78 79 60

451 8 80

10

9

309 309

73

3

61

397

74 75

4

59

450 76

6

5

310

310

407

305

305

304

304

41

406

114 113

351 349

401

63

402

64

403

65

404

66

336

88

87

90

89

67

421

105 106

68

422

107 108 38

162

330

161

69

423

109 110

70

424

111 112 40

166

333

165

168

332

167

163

331

39

37

164

81

13

14

306

71

453

82

16

307

133

209

356

355

210

132

131

355

358

215

356

31 57

448

374 32 136

157

214

196

408

377

158

194

409

378

156

212

216

357

53

123

52

122

34

376 33

211

134

58 449

55

27 195

361

446

126

199 127

159

381

456

29 135

373 30

160

200 457 128

382

213

362

56

379379 383 412

207 197

198

129

208

380 380

130 124

125

384

411

359

202

201

329

326

334

43

399

44

400

42

398

352

72

454

353

325

410 385

455386

387387

388388

375

19

20 354 28

54

193

121

447

507

AO

AO

T 327

AO

AO

AO

326

AO

AO

306

T 307

301

301

T

302

302

T

303

303

T

308

308

T

AO 336

201

360

363

AO 363

364

AO 364

334

STEAM 1

STEAM 2

STEAM 3

STEAM 4

D

15

D

16

D

17

D

18

HTG.W2

HTG.W3

HTG.W1 AO

AO

CHW2 CHW6

CHW7

CHW5

CHW1 CHW3 CHW4

CHW8

CHW9

G 23

121

CHW11

CHW10

G 19

445

G25

G26

G22

G18

CHW13

CHW12

G16 G15

HTG.W5 HTG.W6

HTG.W7

G9

G7

G8

G13

G3

G2

G1 G5

G6

G4

G11

G14 G10

G12

STEAM B

T

AO

154

493

AO

AO

T 325

T

17

AO

395 AO

AO

517

 517DI 518

DI 518

519

 519DI
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5                     
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAY-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   NOV-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                     1
<CASH>                                         52,985
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 679,357
<ALLOWANCES>                                   13,500
<INVENTORY>                                 1,488,888
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            2,363,268
<PP&E>                                      1,269,757
<DEPRECIATION>                                277,822
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              3,729,600
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       1,591,466
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                       87,761
<OTHER-SE>                                  2,304,334
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                3,729,600
<SALES>                                     1,511,569
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            1,511,569
<CGS>                                       1,007,102
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 408,488
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               56,184
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             81,178
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (35,383)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (35,383)
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                      11,278
<NET-INCOME>                                  (24,105)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.00
        


</TABLE>
Exhibit 4.3


 


Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm


We consent to the
reference made to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Part B of the Prospectus
and to the use of our report dated May 19, 2015, in this Registration Statement (Form S-6 No. 333-202719) of Smart Trust, Sustainable
Impact Investing Trust, Series 2.


 


/s/ Grant
Thornton LLP


 


Chicago, Illinois


May 19, 2015
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

ANTHONY L. HANSON, :

 :

Plaintiff, :

 :

vs. : CIVIL ACTION 13-0443-M

 :

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, :

Commission of Social Security, :

 :

Defendant. :

JUDGMENT

In accordance with the Order entered this date, it is 

ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that JUDGMENT be entered in favor 

of Plaintiff Anthony L. Hanson and against Defendant Carolyn W. 

Colvin. It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff be AWARDED an EAJA 

attorney’s fee in the amount of $3,585.41.

DONE this 28th day of October, 2014.

s/BERT W. MILLING, JR. 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-00443-M Document 29 Filed 10/28/14 Page 1 of 1
<page>							         EXHIBIT 31.02

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Kevin Perry, Chief Financial Officer of Demeter Management
Corporation ("Demeter"), the general partner of the registrant,
certify that:

1.	I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the
registrant;

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; and

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


<page>
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 Demeter'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 control over financial
reporting.






Date:   August 16, 2004       /s/Kevin Perry
                                 Kevin Perry
                                 Chief Financial Officer,
                                 Demeter Management Corporation,
                                 general partner of the registrant
11TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Horacio Garcia Castro, * From the 106th District

 Court of Dawson County,

 Trial Court No. 06-6609.

Vs. No. 11-14-00002-CR * August 7, 2014

The State of Texas, * Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

 (Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

 Willson, J., and Bailey, J.)

 This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is 

error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court’s opinion, we 

modify the judgment of the trial court by deleting the following language from the 

judgments: “APPOINTMENT OF ATTORNEY FEE: $300.00.” As modified, 

we affirm.
No. 87-6176.

#### Stout *v.*Grand Prairie Independent School District et al.

Ct. App. Tex., 5th Dist. Certiorari denied.
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A19A0799. STEVEN S. OSTERMAN v. THE STATE. 

In 2011, Steven S. Osterman was charged with numerous offenses and he

ultimately pleaded guilty to burglary and kidnapping. He was sentenced to 25 years

to serve and life on probation and subject to numerousspecial conditions of probation

pursuant to OCGA § 42-8-34.1. In 2017, Osterman filed a “void sentence motion,”

arguing that his sentence was void because he was required to register as a sex

offender pursuant to OCGA § 42-1-12. The trial court denied his motion and he filed

this appeal.

Under OCGA § 17-10-1 (f), a court may modify a sentence during the year

after its imposition or within 120 days after remittitur following a direct appeal,

whichever is later. Frazier v. State, 302 Ga. App. 346, 348 (691 SE2d 247) (2010). 

Once, as here, this statutory period expires, a trial court may modify only a void

sentence. Id. And a direct appeal may lie from an order denying a motion to vacate

a void sentence where the defendant raises a colorable claim that the sentence is, in

fact, void. See Harper v. State, 286 Ga. 216, 217 n. 1 (686 SE2d 786) (2009); Burg

v. State, 297 Ga. App. 118, 119 (676 SE2d 465) (2009). A sentence is void if the

court imposes punishment that the law does not allow. Jones v. State, 278 Ga. 669,

670 (604 SE2d 483) (2004). When a sentence falls within the statutory range of

punishment, it is not void. See id.

In his motion, Osterman does not contend that his sentence is void because it

exceeds the statutory range. Rather, he asserts that it is void because he is subject to

a registration requirement. His special condition of probation states that, should he

be required to register as a sex offender, then he must do so in strict compliance with

December 19, 2018
OCGA § 42-1-12. But this condition is not a registration requirement, and Osterman

has failed to show that he received a sentence in excess of the statutory range of

punishment for his convictions.

Because Osterman has notraised a colorable claimthat hissentence is void, the

trial court’s denial of his motion is not subject to direct appeal. Accordingly, this

appeal is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

12/19/2018
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 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 Local Rule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-40768 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ARTURO CHAIRES HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. BB-95-CR-260

- - - - - - - - - - August 14, 1997 Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Arturo Chaires Hernandez appeals his guilty-plea conviction for escape on the grounds that the district court lacked personal jurisdiction over him because the escape charge was based on a 14- year-old Mexican conviction which he now alleges was obtained by torture. Hernandez’s appeal is without arguable merit and is thus frivolous. Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983).No. - 2 - Because it is frivolous, the appeal is dismissed. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2. APPEAL DISMISSED.
#### *A.*W. Routt’s Adm’r. *v.*W. W. Berry.

Justice of the Peace — Jurisdiction in Appeal from Justice.

Where the amount sought to be recovered in a justice court is only $11.60 the circuit court has' no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal.

*421APPEAL, FROM BATH CIRCUIT COURT.

March 10, 1875.

*Nesbitt & Gudgel, for appellant.*

*Reid & Stone, for appellee.*

Opinion by

Judge Peters:

This action was commenced by warrant from a justice of the peace, by which appellee was summoned “to answer a claim of A. W. Routt,” the holder of an order amounting to $11.60, and judgment having been rendered against the defendant in the warrant,he appealed to the quarterly court. He was unsuccessful in the quarterly court, and appealed to the circuit court, where he succeeded, and this appeal is now prosecuted by the personal representative of the plaintiff in the warrant, he having died intestate since the action was commenced.

It appears in the record that the original warrant was amended by inserting the words “amounting to fifty dollars for balance on wheat.” When this amendment was made is not satisfactorily shown, but it was made before the trial in the justice court, for an account was filed b)' appellant against appellee for $50 balance on wheat.

In *Burbage v. Squires,*3 Met. 77, this court held, upon the trial of the appeal, the cause of action must be the same as that expressed in the warrant, and it must be a cause of action over which the justice had jurisdiction. In this case it will be conceded that the cause of action for the increased demand set forth by the amendment in the warrant was one over which the justice had jurisdiction. But was it the same cause of action as that set out in the original warrant? We think not. The action was founded on an order having the characteristics of a domestic bill of exchange, and to hold the drawer and endorsers responsible, the holder must use due diligence in presenting it for payment, and notice of nonpayment should be given to the parties. When the action on the order wias abandoned and a recovery sought on an account for wheat sold and delivered, the original cause of action was changed.

As, therefore, the amount demanded in the original warrant was the matter in controversy, and that being less than fifty dollars, the court has no jurisdiction of the case.

Wherefore the appeal is *dismissed.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF NABISCO HOLDINGS CORP., WHICH WERE FILED
WITH SEC FORM 10-K, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000932130
<NAME> NABISCO HOLDINGS CORP.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                              93
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      556
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        879
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,629
<PP&E>                                           4,798
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (1,511)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  12,290
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,969
<BONDS>                                          4,213
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             3
<OTHER-SE>                                       4,081
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    12,290
<SALES>                                          8,889
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 8,889
<CGS>                                            5,226
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    5,226
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   656
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 329
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    113
<INCOME-TAX>                                        96
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 17
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        17
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .06
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                                 Netegrity, Inc.

                            Certification Pursuant To
                             18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
                             As Adopted Pursuant To
                  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Netegrity, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Regina O. Sommer, Chief
Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section
1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, that this Report fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in this Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.

Date:  July 28, 2003                  /s/ Regina O. Sommer
                                      __________________________________________
                                      Regina O. Sommer
                                      Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
                                      (Principal Financial Officer and Principal
                                       Accounting Officer)

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to Netegrity, Inc. and will be
retained by Netegrity, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.