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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 701 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 701

To reduce temporarily the duty on certain sorbic acid (hexadienic acid) 
                        (2,4-hexadienoic acid).

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 5, 2005

Mr. Lautenberg introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To reduce temporarily the duty on certain sorbic acid (hexadienic acid) 
                        (2,4-hexadienoic acid).

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN SORBIC ACID.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of Chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

      

``    9902.29.15    Sorbic Acid (CAS  1.9%              No change         No change         On or before 12/
                     No. 110-44-1)                                                           31/2008          ''
                     (provided for                                                                             .
                     in subheading
                     2916.19.20)....

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Felipe CERVANTES-ESPINO, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 08-40632

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

April 30, 2009.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Felipe Cervantes-Espino (Cervantes) has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Cervantes has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. 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.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under *357the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir R. 47.5.4.
#### MacDONALD INTERNATIONAL, Inc., v. VULCAN IRON WORKS, Inc.

Civil Action No. *3006.*

District Court, M. D. Pennsylvania.

Oct. 15, 1947.

*467Caldwell, Fox & Stoner, of Harrisburg, Pa., and Kaye, Scholer, Fierman & Hays, of New York City, for plaintiff.

Bedford, Waller, Jones & Darling, of Wilkes Barre, Pa., for defendant.

WATSON, District Judge.

This is a motion for a more definite statement or a bill of particulars under Rule 12 (e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c.

The complaint filed in this case is very brief, alleging in addition to the jurisdictional allegation an amount due for services rendered in procuring a contract for the purchase of locomotives. Defendant’s motion alleges that the complaint is vague and indefinite; that there is a failure to state whether the contract was oral or written, and that there is a dearth of information as to the names of persons and time and place of the making of the contract.

An answer was filed to the plaintiff’s motion, which will be taken as part of the pleadings. This answer contains considerable information concerning the contract, setting forth that it was oral, by whom and at what time and place it was entered into, and by whom it is alleged to have been confirmed.

It is the opinion of this Court that the remaining information requested by the defendant in its motion may be secured by other means at its disposal; that is, by use of Rules 26 and 33 to 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The complaint, when accompanied by the answer to the motion for a more definite statement, makes averments “with sufficient definiteness or particularity to enable the Defendant properly to prepare his responsive pleading.”

This court has repeatedly held that motions under Rule 12(e) are properly presented only where the complaint is so vague or ambiguous, or contains such broad generalizations, that the defendant cannot frame an answer thereto, or understand the nature and extent of the charges so as generally to prepare for trial. Brinley v. Lewis, D.C., 27 F.Supp. 313.

The motion of the defendant for a more definite statement, or a bill of particulars, is dismissed.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 
                      AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Pursuant to 
                       18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
                     as Adopted Pursuant to
                     Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, we the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of NPS Pharmaceuticals, Inc. certify that the
Annual Report of NPS Pharmaceuticals, Inc. on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K/A fairly presents in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of NPS Pharmaceuticals, Inc.



|Date: May 19, 2008 | /s/ FRANCOIS NADER
                      Francois NaderPresident and Chief Executive Officer
|------------------ | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|Date: May 19, 2008 | /s/ LUKE M. BESHAR
                      Luke M. Beshar Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|------------------ | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b)
of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-K/A or as a separate disclosure
document.

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

---
EXHIBIT 31.2  CERTIFICATION  I, David Corcoran, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of International Barrier Technology Inc.;  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  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 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 control over financial reporting.  /s/ David Corcoran David Corcoran CFO/Director September 28, 2007
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                      <C> 
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS                    9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         JUN-30-1997              JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                            JUL-01-1996              JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                              MAR-31-1997              MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                              0                   54,668
<SECURITIES>                                        0                   28,600
<RECEIVABLES>                                       0                   31,690
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0                  (5,792)
<INVENTORY>                                         0                   44,929
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    0                  186,563
<PP&E>                                              0                   54,731
<DEPRECIATION>                                      0                 (23,938)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      0                  256,147
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               0                   99,115
<BONDS>                                             0                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0                        0
<PREFERRED>                                         0                        0
<COMMON>                                            0                   13,969
<OTHER-SE>                                          0                  141,367
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        0                  256,147
<SALES>                                        52,247                   63,943
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               52,247                   63,943
<CGS>                                          40,604                   48,518
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  40,604                   48,518
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                9,096                    9,410
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   94                      611
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (2,617)                       81
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (73,596)                 (72,669)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (28,996)                 (24,828)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (44,600)                 (47,841)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 76,740                   26,746
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0                        0
<CHANGES>                                           0                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                   32,140                 (21,095)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    1.33                   (0.81)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    1.33                   (0.81)
<FN>

Note: Prior year numbers are restated to reflect the reclassification of the
      video games segment as discontinued operations
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of Brandon A., Appellant. Livingston County Attorney, Respondent.

[964 NYS2d 328]

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Livingston County (Robert B. Wiggins, J.), entered April 9, 2012 in a proceeding *1366pursuant to Family Court Act article 3. The order, inter alia, adjudicated respondent to be a juvenile delinquent.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs and the petition is dismissed.

On appeal from an order, inter alia, adjudicating respondent to be a juvenile delinquent based upon his admission that he committed an act that, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree (Penal Law § 220.31), respondent contends that the petition was facially insufficient. We agree. We note at the outset that, because a facially sufficient petition is a jurisdictional prerequisite to adjudicating respondent a juvenile delinquent, respondent’s admission does not preclude his challenge to the petition *(see Matter of Shane B.,*4 AD3d 650, 651 [2004]). A juvenile delinquency petition is facially sufficient when “the allegations of the factual part of the petition, together with those of any supporting depositions which may accompany it, provide reasonable cause to believe that the respondent committed the crime or crimes charged” and when “non-hearsay allegations of the factual part of the petition or of any supporting depositions establish, if true, every element of each crime charged and the respondent’s commission thereof” (Family Ct Act § 311.2 [2], [3]; see *Matter of Angel A,*92 NY2d 430, 433 [1998]).

Respondent correctly contends that the petition fails to include sufficient nonconclusory factual allegations to establish reasonable cause and a prima facie case for the crime charged. The petition alleged that respondent knowingly and unlawfully sold a controlled substance, i.e., Adderall *(see*Penal Law § 220.31). The Court of Appeals has made clear that “[standing alone, a conclusory statement that a substance seized from a defendant was a particular type of controlled substance does not meet the reasonable cause requirement” *(People v Kalin,*12 NY3d 225, 229 [2009]). Petitioner must provide factual allegations that establish a reliable basis for inferring the presence of a controlled substance *(see id.; Angel A.,*92 NY2d at 434-435). The petition here is supported by only the conclusory statements of respondent’s classmate and an officer that the substance was Adderall. Their statements are not “supported by evidentiary facts showing the basis for the conclusion that the substance sold was actually [Adderall]” *(People v Dumas,*68 NY2d 729, 731 [1986]; *cf. Kalin,*12 NY3d at 229-231; *Angel A.,*92 NY2d at 432-435; *People v Pearson,*78 AD3d 445, 445 [2010], *lv denied*16 NY3d 799 [2011]).

Present—Centra, J.P, Fahey, Carni, Lindley and Whalen, JJ.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #11726 and #11727]

# AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Amendment 1.

# SUMMARY:

This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Arkansas (FEMA-1834-DR), dated 04/27/2009.

*Incident:*                         Severe Storms and Tornadoes.                    

*Incident Period:*                         04/09/2009.                    

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         05/07/2009.                    

*Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         06/26/2009.                    

*EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         01/27/2010.                    

# ADDRESSES:

Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of the Presidential disaster declaration for the State of Arkansas, dated 04/27/2009 is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster:

*Primary Counties:*                     (                    *Physical Damage and Economic Injury Loans*): Ashley                

*Contiguous Counties/Parishes: (Economic Injury Loans Only):*

Arkansas: Bradley, Chicot, Drew, Union

Louisiana: Morehouse, Union

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

James E. Rivera,

Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.

[FR Doc. E9-11288 Filed 5-13-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
Exhibit 23.2

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


The Board of Directors
PennCorp Financial Group, Inc.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No.
333-13285) on Form S-3 and (Nos. 333-48629, 333-48631 and 333-48637) on Form S-8
of PennCorp  Financial Group, Inc. of our report dated March 19, 1998,  relating
to the  consolidated  balance sheets of Southwestern  Financial  Corporation and
subsidiaries  as of  December  31, 1997 and 1996,  and the related  consolidated
statements of income,  shareholders'  equity,  and cash flows for the years then
ended,  which report appears in the December 31, 1997 annual report on Form 10-K
of PennCorp Financial Group, Inc.

                                             KPMG LLP




Dallas, Texas
March 31, 1999
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Johnathan Johnson, Appellant, v Brian Fischer, as Commissioner of Correctional Services, et al., Respondents.

Submitted May 17, 2010;

decided June 29, 2010

Motion for reargument of motion for leave to appeal denied *[see*14 NY3d 707 (2010)].
EXHIBIT 23.2

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

The Board of Directors
PennCorp Financial Group, Inc.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No.
333-13285) on Form S-3 and (Nos. 333-48629, 333-48631 and 333-48637) on Form S-8
of PennCorp  Financial Group, Inc. of our report dated March 19, 1998,  relating
to the  consolidated  balance sheet of  Southwestern  Financial  Corporation and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 1997, and the related consolidated statements of
income,  shareholders'  equity,  and cash flows for the year then  ended,  which
report  appears in the December 31, 1999 annual  report on Form 10-K of PennCorp
Financial Group, Inc.

                                    KPMG LLP




Dallas, Texas
April 10, 2000
IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2021 ND 65

In the Interest of F.M.G.

Eduardo P. Yabut, MD, Petitioner and Appellee

v.

F.M.G., Respondent and Appellant

No. 20210087

Appeal from the District Court of Stutsman County, Southeast Judicial 

District, the Honorable Mark T. Blumer, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Leo A. Ryan, Special Assistant Attorney General, Jamestown, ND, for 

petitioner and appellee; submitted on brief.

Andrew Marquart, Fargo, ND, for respondent and appellant; submitted on 

brief.

FILED 

IN THE OFFICE OF THE 

CLERK OF SUPREME COURT 

APRIL 14, 2021 

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
1

Interest of F.M.G. 

No. 20210087

Per Curiam.

[¶1] F.M.G. appeals from the district court’s continuing treatment order. 

F.M.G. argues the court erred in finding clear and convincing evidence that 

she is mentally ill and a person requiring treatment. We summarily affirm 

under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

[¶2] Jon J. Jensen, C.J. 

Gerald W. VandeWalle 

Daniel J. Crothers 

Lisa Fair McEvers 

Jerod E. Tufte
#### Tubiolo v. Abundant Life Church, Inc.

Case below: 180 N.C. App. 238

No. 621P06

Pits’ PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 (COA06-193)

Denied 06/27/07

Hudson, J., Recused
A04A1696.

#### PAYNE et al. v. TERRELL et al.

(629 SE2d 839)

Decided April 7, 2006.

*Donald D. J. Stack, Jonathan L. Schwartz,*for appellants.

*Stewart, Melvin & Frost, J. Douglas Stewart,*for appellees.

Bernes, Judge.

In *Payne v. Terrell,*269 Ga. App. 540 (604 SE2d 551) (2004), we reversed the trial court’s denial of a permanent injunction sought by the Payne family and held that the Terrells’ commercial poultry venture constituted a nuisance as a matter of law at the particular site proposed for the construction of four poultry houses. The Supreme Court granted certiorari and, in *Terrell v. Payne,*280 Ga. 51 (622 SE2d 330) (2005), reversed our decision. We therefore vacate our earlier opinion and adopt the judgment of the Supreme Court as our own.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Ruffin, C. J., and Adams, J., concur.*
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

MIDDLE DISTRICT 

ZIEGENFUSS DRILLING, INC., 

 Petitioner 

 v. 

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEAL 

BOARD (DAILEY), 

 Respondents 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 51 MAL 2016 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Commonwealth Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 8th day of June, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.