alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
S. Con. Res. 108 Agreed to July 12, 2006

One Hundred Ninth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,

the third day of January, two thousand and six

Concurrent Resolution

Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring),

SECTION 1. POCKET VERSION OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.

(a) IN GENERAL.—The 22nd edition of the pocket version of

the United States Constitution shall be printed as a Senate document under the direction of the Joint Committee on Printing.

(b) ADDITIONAL COPIES.—In addition to the usual number, there

shall be printed the lesser of—

(1) 550,000 copies of the document, of which 440,000 copies

shall be for the use of the House of Representatives, 100,000

copies shall be for the use of the Senate, and 10,000 copies

shall be for the use of the Joint Committee on Printing; or

(2) such number of copies of the document as does not exceed a total production and printing cost of $198,000 with

distribution to be allocated in the same proportion as described

in paragraph (1), except that in no case shall the number

of copies be less than 1 for each Member of Congress.

SEC. 2. OUR FLAG.

(a) IN GENERAL.—The 2006 revised edition of the publication

entitled ‘‘Our Flag’’ shall be printed as a Senate document under

the direction of the Joint Committee on Printing.

(b) ADDITIONAL COPIES.—In addition to the usual number, there

shall be printed the lesser of—

(1) 550,000 copies of the document, of which 440,000 copies

shall be for the use of the House of Representatives, 100,000

copies shall be for the use of the Senate, and 10,000 copies

shall be for the use of the Joint Committee on Printing; or

(2) such number of copies of the document as does not

exceed a total production and printing cost of $215,000 with

distribution to be allocated in the same proportion as described

in paragraph (1), except that in no case shall the number

of copies be less than 1 for each Member of Congress.

SEC. 3. A BOTANIC GARDEN FOR THE NATION.

(a) IN GENERAL.—There shall be printed as a Senate document

under the direction of the Joint Committee on Printing the book

entitled ‘‘A Botanic Garden for the Nation’’, prepared by the United

States Botanic Gardens.

(b) SPECIFICATIONS.—The Senate document described in subsection (a) shall include illustrations and shall be in the style,

form, manner, and binding as directed by the Joint Committee

on Printing.
S. Con. Res. 108—2

(c) NUMBER OF COPIES.—In addition to the usual number of

copies, there shall be printed with suitable binding the lesser of—

(1) 3,075 copies of the document, of which 725 copies shall

be for the use of the Senate and 1,470 for the use of the

House of Representatives with distribution determined by the

Joint Committee on Printing, 880 copies for the use of the

Botanic Gardens with distribution determined by the Joint

Committee of Congress on the Library; or

(2) a number of copies that does not have a total production

and printing cost of more than $102,000.

Attest:

Secretary of the Senate.

Attest:

Clerk of the House of Representatives.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

WESTERN DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

 Respondent 

 v. 

GREGORY RICHARD SPENCE, 

 Petitioner 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 16 WAL 2016 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 24th day of May, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Patrick W. Hurley, Chief Financial Officer ofSport-Haley, Inc., certify that:

 

1.     Ihave reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Sport-Haley, Inc.

 

2.     Basedon my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.     Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

(a)   Designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

(b)   Designed suchinternal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control overfinancial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonableassurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparationof financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generallyaccepted accounting principles;

 

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

 

(d)   Disclosed in thisreport any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

4.     Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

(a)   All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

 

(b)   Any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

Date:  April 13,2009

 

 
| /s/ PATRICK W.  HURLEY  |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| Patrick W.  Hurley      |   |
| Chief Financial Officer |   |

 

----
Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection with the Annual Report of Sport-Haley, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2004, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), we, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, do each certify, to our
respective knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



Dated:
October 13, 2004

|/s/KEVIN M. TOMLINSONKevin M. Tomlinson
Chief Executive Officer |  |  | 
|--------------------------------------------------------------- |  |  | 
|/s/PATRICK W. HURLEYPatrick W. Hurley
Chief Financial Officer   |  |  | 

---



QuickLinks
**Exhibit 10.2**

 

**Independent Auditors’ Consent**

 

As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement of KTCorporation on Form F-3 (No. 333-100251) of our reports dated March 7, 2003 and January 26, 2002, relating to our audit of the financial statements of KT Freetel Co., Ltd., and our report dated May 25, 2001, relating to our audit of the financialstatements of KT M.com Co., Ltd. (which reports express an unqualified opinion and include explanatory paragraphs related to the adverse economic circumstances in the Republic of Korea and Asia Pacific region in general, and refer to the acquisitionof KT ICOM Co., Ltd.’s common share by KT Freetel Co., Ltd., the merger of KT Freetel Co., Ltd. with KT ICOM Co., Ltd., the name change of Korea Telecom Freetel Co., Ltd. to KT Freetel Co., Ltd., and the merger of KT Freetel Co., Ltd. with KTM.Com Co., Ltd.), appearing in the Annual Report on Form 20-F of KT Corporation for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002, and to the reference to our firm under the heading “Experts” in the registration statement on Form F-3 of KTCorporation. 

 

Anjin & Co. 

Seoul, Korea 

June 25, 2003
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                          5
       
<S>                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  OCT-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                     NOV-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                       APR-30-1997
<CASH>                               1,091,631 
<SECURITIES>                                 0 
<RECEIVABLES>                       23,638,184 
<ALLOWANCES>                           708,879 
<INVENTORY>                         22,205,425 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                    49,890,499 
<PP&E>                              20,288,046 
<DEPRECIATION>                       8,706,621 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                      62,322,726 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>               13,599,208 
<BONDS>                              4,647,509 
<COMMON>                                12,213 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        0 
<PREFERRED>                                  0 
<OTHER-SE>                          43,436,084 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>        62,322,726 
<SALES>                             50,458,856 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                    50,458,856 
<CGS>                               31,334,455 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                       43,502,825 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        16,910 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                        87,753 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                     326,373 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                      6,612,748 
<INCOME-TAX>                         2,557,325 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                  4,055,423 
<DISCONTINUED>                               0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              0 
<CHANGES>                                    0 
<NET-INCOME>                         4,055,423 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                             0.33 
<EPS-DILUTED>                             0.32
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2710 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain ion exchange resins. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 2, 2009 

Mr. LAUTENBERG introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain ion 

exchange resins. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN ION-EXCHANGE RESINS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.39.30 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 certain ion exchange resins) is amended by striking ‘‘12/ 

7 31/2009’’ and inserting ‘‘12/31/2011’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2710 IS

1 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

2 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A17A1062. CLARENCE STRICKLAND v. THE STATE.

A jury found Clarence Strickland guilty of aggravated sodomy in 2009, and we

affirmed his conviction on appeal. Strickland v. State, 311 Ga. App. 400 (715 SE2d

798) (2011). In 2016, Strickland filed a motion for an out-of-time appeal, which the

trial court dismissed. Strickland then filed this direct appeal. We lack jurisdiction.

“An out-of-time appeal is a judicial creation that serves as the remedy for a

frustrated right of appeal.” Kilgore v. State, 325 Ga. App. 874, 875 (1) (756 SE2d 9)

(2014) (punctuation omitted). Because Strickland already has had a direct appeal, he

is not entitled to an out-of-time appeal. See Richards v. State, 275 Ga. 190, 191 (563

SE2d 856) (2002) (“[T]here is no right to directly appeal the denial of a motion for

out-of-time appeal filed by a criminal defendant whose conviction has been affirmed

on direct appeal.”); Jackson v. State, 273 Ga. 320 (540 SE2d 612) (2001) (a defendant

“is not entitled to another bite at the apple by way of a second appeal”). Accordingly,

this appeal is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

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.

February 14, 2017

02/14/2017
**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 Columbia Laboratories, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, James A. Meer, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
      U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, that 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; and
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




|(2) | The
              information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
              respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
              Company.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ James
              A.
              MeerJames A. Meer
              Chief
                  Financial Officer
                May
                  9, 2007
**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 **

| (1)   | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|-----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (2)   | The                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the                Company. |
|-----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | /s/ David L. WeinbergDavid                  L. WeinbergChief                  Financial OfficerNovember                  7, 2005 |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----
Unassociated Document


    LOAN
      AGREEMENT

    (English
      Translation)

    


    This
      is
      an agreement between the following parties:

    


    
      	
              Party
                A:

            	
              Fengying
                Zhang

            
	 	 
	
              Party
                B: 

            	
              Perfectenergy
                (Shanghai), Ltd.

            


    

    


    The
      parties hereto enter into this agreement voluntarily, after friendly
      negotiations, to enable Party B to borrow money from Party A, as
      follows:

    


    
      	 	
              1.

            	
              To
                address Party B’s cash flow issue, Party A agrees to loan Party B Two
                Million RMB.

            


    

    


    
      	 	
              2.

            	
              Party
                B agrees to borrow the money described above for cash flow, and agrees
                to
                pay Party A interest at the rate of 7.2% per
                annum.

            


    

    


    
      	 	
              3.

            	
              Funding
                method: Party A shall transfer the entire sum into Party B’s account, and
                the parties agree that interest shall begin on September 5,
                2006.

            


    

    


    
      	 	
              4.

            	
              Term
                of loan: September 5, 2006 to March 4, 2007. At the end of the term,
                Party
                B shall repay Party A the borrowed sum in one
                payment.

            


    

    


    
      	 	
              5.

            	
              Payment
                of interest: Party B shall pay Party A interest on a monthly
                basis.

            


    

    


    
      	 	
              6.

            	
              The
                parties hereto agree to resolve any disputes amicably.
                

            


    

    


    
      	 	
              7.

            	
              This
                agreement will be in two originals, with each party holding one.
                This
                agreement will be effective upon the parties’ signatures and
                stamps.

            


    

    


    
      	
              Party
                A: Fengying Zhang

            	
              Party
                B: Perfectenergy (Shanghai), Ltd.

            
	 	 
	
              Signature:

            	
              Signature:

            
	 	 
	
              Seal:

            	
              Company
                Seal:

            
	 	 
	
              Date:
                9-5-2006
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 19

- 00348

- CV
Jennifer Paige Meaux

v. Palacios Marine & Industrial Coatings, Inc. and Greg Garcia

On a ppeal from the 135th District Court of Victoria County , Texas Trial Cause No. 18

- 10

- 83434

- B

JUDGMENT
THE THIRTEE NTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed . The Court orders the appeal DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion . Costs of the appeal are adjudged against appellant. We further order this decisi on certified below for observance. October 10, 2019
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D20-759

_____________________________

JULES K. LEE,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Mark Borello, Judge.

September 30, 2020

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

MAKAR, OSTERHAUS, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Jules K. Lee, pro se, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Exhibit 32.1








CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Books-A-Million, Inc. (the “Company”) hereby certifies, to the best of such officer’s knowledge, that:





(i)
the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended January 29, 2011 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





(ii)
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








Dated:  April 14, 2011                                                                      /s/ Clyde B. Anderson


Clyde B. Anderson


Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
The District Court of the 13th Judicial District. County of Yellowstone.

#### STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff, vs. *3RICHARD BAXTER, Defendant.

*2CAUSE NO. DC-07-635 DECISION

*3On October 6, 2008, the defendant was sentenced as follows: Count I: Thirty (30) years in the Montana State Prison, with ten (10) years suspended, for the offense of Sexual Assault, a felony. The defendant shall not be eligible for parole until he completes Phases I and II of the Sexual Offender Treatment Program.

On February 4, 2010, the defendant’s application for review of that sentence was heard by the Sentence Review Division of the Montana Supreme Court.

The defendant was present and was represented by Sandy Selvey. The state was represented by Ann-Marie McKittrick, who appeared via videoconference.

Before hearing the application, the defendant was advised that the Sentence Review Division has the authority not only to reduce the sentence or affirm it, but also increase it. The defendant was further advised that there is no appeal from a decision of the Sentence Review Division. The defendant acknowledged that he understood this and stated that he wished to proceed.

Rule 17 of the Rules of the Sentence Review Division of the Supreme Court of Montana provides that “the sentence imposed by the District Court is presumed correct, and the sentence will not be reduced or increased unless it is deemed clearly inadequate or excessive.” (§46-18-904(3), MCA).

The Division finds that the reasons advanced for modification are insufficient to hold that the sentence imposed by the District Court is inadequate or excessive.

Therefore, it is the unanimous decision of the Sentence Review Division that the sentence shall be affirmed.

Done in open Court this 4 th day of February, 2010.

DATED this 23rd day of February, 2010.

Chairperson, Hon. Blair Jones, Member, Hon. Richard Simonton and Member, Hon. Ray Dayton.
Exhibit 3.2.5

WRITTEN CONSENT IN LIEU OF
MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OF SPORT-HALEY, INC.

We, the undersigned, being all the members of the Board of Directors of Sport-Haley, Inc., a Colorado corporation (the "Corporation") do hereby vote for,
adopt, approve and consent to the following resolutions and actions contemplated thereby, it being our understanding and intention that the execution of this Written Consent shall have the same effect
as if a meeting of the Board of Directors had been properly called pursuant to notice and all directors had been present and voted in favor of the resolutions presented herein:



1

---









IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, being all the members of the Board of Directors of the Corporation, have hereunto set their seals on the date set forth below, the resolutions
contained herein to be effective as of October 1, 2004.

|Date: October 4, 2004 |  | /s/KEVIN M. TOMLINSONKevin M. Tomlinson
|--------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------
|Date: October 5, 2004 |  | /s/JAMES H. EVERESTJames H. Everest    
|Date: October 8, 2004 |  | /s/RONALD J. NORICKRonald J. Norick    
|Date: October 4, 2004 |  | /s/MARK J. STEVENSONMark J. Stevenson  
|Date: October 4, 2004 |  | /s/JAMES R. TENBROOKJames R. TenBrook  

2

---



QuickLinks