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

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 703

To provide for the use of COPS funds for State and local intelligence officers, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 11, 2003

Mr. SAXTON (for himself and Mr. COBLE) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL

To provide for the use of COPS funds for State and local 

intelligence officers, 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. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Law Enforcement 

5 Partnership to Combat Terrorism Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. USE OF COPS FUNDS FOR INTELLIGENCE OFFI7 CERS. 

8 Section 1701 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe 

9 Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796dd) is amended by 

10 adding at the end the following new subsection: 
2

•HR 703 IH 

1 ‘‘(l) GRANTS FOR INTELLIGENCE OFFICERS.—

2 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other 

3 provision of this Act, not less than 25 percent of 

4 amounts made available to carry out this part shall 

5 be used only for programs, projects, and other ac6 tivities to—

7 ‘‘(A) increase the number of law enforce8 ment officers involved in activities that are fo9 cused on intelligence for the purposes of com10 batting terrorism by hiring new officers and re11 deploying existing officers to such activities; 

12 ‘‘(B) provide specialized training to not 

13 more than one intelligence officer, and not more 

14 than one analyst officer, per recipient of grant 

15 amounts, to enhance such officers’ observation, 

16 intelligence gathering, foreign language, and 

17 analytic skills needed to focus on intelligence 

18 for the purposes of combatting terrorism; and 

19 ‘‘(C) enhance coordination among Federal, 

20 State, and local law enforcement officers in21 volved in activities specified in subparagraph 

22 (A), to ensure a concentrated, connected nation23 wide effort to combat terrorism. 

24 ‘‘(2) SECURITY CLEARANCES.—The Attorney 

25 General shall ensure that an intelligence officer or 
3

•HR 703 IH 

1 analyst officer under paragraph (1)(B) has a secu2 rity clearance of not less than the ‘top secret’ level.’’.

Æ
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 6 D0 22 4 . DUSTI N CARROLL v . J AMES DAVI S.

Pri o r t o th e d ead l i n e fo r fi l i n g an ap pl i cat i o n fo r d i s cret i on ary ap p eal

, Du s t in

Carro l l o b t ai n ed an ex t en s i o n o f t i m e i n wh ich t o fi l e. 1 Carro l l at t em p ted t o e-fi l e t h e

ap p li cat io n o n J an u ary 1 1, 2 0 1 6, t h e d u e dat e. Bu t h e m i s t ak en ly fi l ed t h e ap p l i cat i o n

u n d er t h e em erg en cy m ot i o n cas e n u m b er , wh ich res u l t ed i n t h e ap p l i cat i o n b ei n g

ret u rn ed wi t h o ut h av i ng b een d o ck et ed . Carro l l s u cces s fu l l y e-fi l ed t h e ap p l i cat i o n

o n Jan uary 1 2

, 2 0 16

. H e al s o fi l ed a “ m o ti o n t o accep t as d at e s ub m i t t ed

, ” req u es t i n g

t h at we u s e J an u ary

1 1 t h as t h e fi l i n g d at e.

Un d er OCGA § 5 -6 -3 0

, t h i s Co u rt i s req u i red t o l i b eral l y co n s t ru e t h e Ap p el l at e Pract ice Act t o b ri ng ab o u t a d eci s i o n on t h e m eri t s

. In k eep i n g wi t h t h i s

m an d at e, Carro l l ’ s m o t i o n is he r e by G R A N T E D

. U p o n rev i ew o f th e m eri t s , h o wev er,

t h e ap p l i cat i o n i s DENIED.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O f f i c e
, A t la n t a
,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti fy t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d th e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t

h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

.

1 B e c a u s e t h ere i s n o ap pl i cat i o n pen d in g wh en s u ch an ex t en si o n i s s o u g h t

,

m o ti o n s fo r a n ex t en s i o n are t reat ed as em erg en cy m o t i o n s an d as s i g n ed an

em erg en cy

m o t i o n n u m

b er. 02/03/2016 February 03, 2016
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 654 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 654

  To require the head of each Federal agency in the Department of the 
 Interior to consider whether actions of the agency have any disparate 
    impact on any member of a racial, ethnic, or religious minority.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 7, 2003

 Mr. Andrews introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
    Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on 
 Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, 
 in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
                jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To require the head of each Federal agency in the Department of the 
 Interior to consider whether actions of the agency have any disparate 
    impact on any member of a racial, ethnic, or religious minority.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Environmental Justice Act''.

SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT TO CONSIDER DISPARATE IMPACTS OF FEDERAL AGENCY 
              ACTIONS.

    The head of each Federal agency in the Department of the Interior 
shall--
            (1) before authorizing, funding, or carrying out any action 
        under any Federal law, consider whether the action will have 
        any disparate impact on any member of a racial, ethnic, or 
        religious minority; and
            (2) in authorizing, funding, or carrying out any action 
        under any Federal law, seek to limit such disparate impacts to 
        the extent possible consistent with such law.

SEC. 3. ENFORCEMENT.

     A violation of section 2 with respect to any individual who is a 
member of a racial, ethnic, or religious minority shall be treated as a 
deprivation of a right of the individual for purposes of section 1979 
of the Revised Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1983).

SEC. 4. AGENCY DEFINED.

     In this Act the term ``agency'' has the meaning given that term by 
section 551 of title 5, United States Code.

SEC. 5. APPLICATION.

    (a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), this Act 
applies to any agency action taken on or after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
    (b) Limitation.--This Act does not apply to an agency action to the 
extent that there is involved a matter relating to agency management or 
personnel.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 32****CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted), DougSabella, Chief Executive Officer of Veraz Networks, Inc. (the “Company”), and Al Wood, the ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, each hereby certify that, to the best of his knowledge:**1.**The Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, and to whichthis Certification is attached as Exhibit 32 (the “***Periodic Report***”) fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and**2.**The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.**INWITNESS WHEREOF,**the undersigned have set their hands hereto asof the 14th day of August, 2007.       /s/ Doug Sabella      Doug Sabella    **CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**         /s/ Al Wood      Al Wood    **CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**
#### Island ADC, Inc., Appellant, v Baldassano Architectural Group, P.C., Respondent.

[854 NYS2d 230]

The plaintiff commenced this action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract. Frior to answering, the defendants moved, inter alia, pursuant to CFLR 3211 (a) (5) to dismiss the complaint as time-barred. The Supreme Court granted that branch of the motion, and we now reverse.

*816On a motion to dismiss a cause of action pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (5) on the ground that it is barred by the statute of limitations, a defendant bears the initial burden of establishing, prima facie, that the time in which to sue has expired *(see Sabadie v Burke,*47 AD3d 913 [2008]; *Matter of Schwartz,*44 AD3d 779 [2007]). In considering the motion, a court must take the allegations in the complaint as true and resolve all inferences in favor of the plaintiff *(see Sabadie v Burke,*47 AD3d 913 [2008]; *Matter of Schwartz,*44 AD3d at 779). Here, the defendants argued that the complaint was time-barred because the causes of action accrued on October 10, 1998 when the work performed pursuant to the contract the plaintiff alleged they breached was completed, and the action was not commenced until December 19, 2006, well past the expiration of the applicable statute of limitations of six years *(see*CPLR 213 [2]; *Phillips Constr. Co. v City of New York,*61 NY2d 949, 951 [1984]; *Petracca v Petracca,*305 AD2d 566, 567 [2003]). However, the plaintiff alleged that the statute of limitations started running anew in January 2001 when the defendants made a partial payment on the balance due on the contract, and wrote to the plaintiff acknowledging that an additional balance was due and promising to pay the same in monthly installments *(see Stern v Stern Metals, Inc.,*22 AD3d 567 [2005]). Thus, the Supreme Court erred in granting that branch of the defendants’ motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (5) to dismiss the complaint as time-barred. Spolzino, J.P., Ritter, Santucci and Carni, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 31.1







Certification Under Exchange Act Rules 13a – 14(a) and 15d – 14(a)



I, Al Millar, certify that:



| | 1. | I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A, Amendment No. 1, of Alpha Pro Tech, Ltd for the period ended June 30, 2015; and
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|Date:          November 5, 2015 |     |                        
|------------------------------- | --- | -----------------------
|                                |     |                        
|                                |     |                        
|                                | By: | /s/Al Millar           
|                                |     | Al Millar              
|                                |     | Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                       3,860,397
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,047,818
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (165,764)
<INVENTORY>                                  4,269,716
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            11,168,344
<PP&E>                                       2,487,353
<DEPRECIATION>                               (951,525)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              13,653,593
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,080,734
<BONDS>                                      1,050,339
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          1
<COMMON>                                           341
<OTHER-SE>                                   8,806,490
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                13,653,593
<SALES>                                      9,454,434
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,454,434
<CGS>                                        7,630,129
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,176,333
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              24,075
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (226,376)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (226,376)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (226,376)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
# 2018-Violence-occ-industry-own

&8page &P of &N
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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of PRIMEDIA Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Charles G. McCurdy, President and Interim Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



/s/
Charles G. McCurdy

Charles
G. McCurdy
President and Interim Chief Executive Officer
August 14, 2003

This
certification accompanies each Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

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

---

QuickLinks
# 2011 - 2017
Exhibit 23.1

               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


We have issued our report dated September 4, 2002, accompanying the consolidated
financial  statements  and  included  in the  Annual  Report of Kronos  Advanced
Technologies,  Inc. on Form 10-KSB for the year ended June 30,  2003.  We hereby
consent to the  incorporation  by reference  of said report in the  Registration
Statement  of  Kronos  Advanced  Technologies,  Inc.  on  Forms  S-1  (File  No.
33-97991).


/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP
----------------------
Portland, Oregon
September 29, 2003
Case 2:11-cv-03849-SDW -MCA Document 6 Filed 07/26/11 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 44
#### Carroway Luxury Homes, LLC, Respondent, v Integra Supply Corporation, Appellant.

[853 NYS2d 518]

*1198It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs. Present—Hurlbutt, J.P., Smith, Fahey, Peradotto and Pine, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       1,315,667
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               10,153,759
<ALLOWANCES>                                   413,000
<INVENTORY>                                  1,776,688
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            13,097,263
<PP&E>                                         184,977
<DEPRECIATION>                                  40,691
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,903,359
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        9,677,438
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         7,819
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,198,102
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,903,359
<SALES>                                     36,586,973
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            36,586,973
<CGS>                                       32,700,813
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,949,131
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (19,667)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             432,122
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                524,574
<INCOME-TAX>                                    31,971
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            492,603
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   492,603
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .07
        

</TABLE>
#### James P. MITCHELL, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor v. Joseph Lyndon EAVES, individually and d/b/a Eaves Produce Company (two cases).

Civ. A. Nos. 3403, 3404.

United States District Court E. D. Tennessee, S. D.

May 7, 1959.

Jeter S. Ray, Nashville, Tenn., for plaintiff.

Noone & Noone, Chattanooga, Tenn., for defendant.

DARR, District Judge.

Service was obtained on the defendant in these cases on January 27, 1959, and on April 27, 1959, the Clerk of the Court entered a default against the defendant, no answer having been filed and no request having been made to the Court for an extension of time in which to answer.

On April 28, 1959, the defendant moved the Court to set aside the entry of default, and one of the attorneys for the defendant filed an affidavit attempting to explain, in part, the delay. The attempted explanation applies almost exclusively to the period of two weeks *435prior to April 27, without any satisfactory explanation of the delay without extension prior to that time.

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not favor delay. Default could have been entered by the Clerk on or about February 20, more than two months prior to the actual entry of default. A hope of settlement does not justify a failure to obtain an extension of time to answer. Despite this delay, since a trial on the merits is much to be preferred to a default, the motion of the defendant will be granted. See Bridoux v. Eastern Air Lines, 93 U.S.App.D.C. 369, 214 F.2d 207.

In view of the above ruling, the plaintiff’s motion for a judgment on the default is denied.

Order accordingly.
# Violence-industry-source-own

&8page &P of &N
```

                                               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in this Initial Registration Statement on Form N-14 ("Registration
Statement") of the following:

   1.   Our report dated December 5, 2003, relating to the financial statements and financial highlights which appears in the
        October 31, 2003 Annual Report to Shareholders of The Lutheran Brotherhood Family of Funds, which is incorporated by
        reference in Post-Effective Amendment No. 75 to the registration statement on Form N-1A filed on December 22, 2003
        which is incorporated by reference into the Registration Statement.

   2.   Our report dated June 6, 2003, relating to the financial statements and financial highlights which appears in the
        April 30, 2003 Annual Report to Shareholders of The AAL Mutual Funds, which was incorporated by reference in Post-Effective
        Amendment No. 47 to the registration statement on Form N-1A filed on June 27, 2003 which is incorporated by reference
        into the Registration Statement.

We also consent to the references to us under the heading "Financial Highlights" in Appendix B attached to the Registration
Statement.

/s/PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
March 11, 2004
```
SHARE PURCHASE AGREEMENT
 YU-CHIA LEE
 
and 
 GIGAMEDIA CHINA LIMITED
 June 6th, 2007
 1




---



##### 



SHARE PURCHASE AGREEMENT
 Agreement
 YU-CHIA LEE Selling Shareholder
 GIGAMEDIA CHINA LIMITED Purchaser
 WHEREAS
 Company
  Purchase Shares
  SECTION 1 DEFINITIONS
  GIGAMEDIA
 MAA
 New Articles Existing
Shareholders
 New Shareholders Agreement
 1




---



##### 



November 25, 2006 Shareholders Agreement
 Ordinary Shares
 SECTION 2 AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE AND SALE
 Agreement to Purchase and Sale.
 Purchase Price. Purchase Price
 Payment of the Purchase Price.
 Installment
 SECTION 3 CLOSING; DELIVERY
 Closing Closing th Closing Date
 Delivery at the Closing
  2




---



##### 



SECTION 4 REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF THE SELLING SHAREHOLDER
  Organization, Good Standing and Qualification.
 Valid Issuance of Purchase Shares.
 Due Authorization Ancillary Agreements
 No Conflicts
 3




---



##### 



i ii iii
 Activities since Balance Sheet Date.
 Disclosure.
 SECTION 5 REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF THE PURCHASER
  Authorization
 No Conflicts; Consents and Approvals, etc i ii
 4




---



##### 



SECTION 6 ADDITIONAL COVENANTS
 Filing of the New Articles
 Operation in Ordinary Course.
 Work with the Company for additional two years. nd
  SECTION 7 CONDITIONS TO CLOSING BY PURCHASER
  Representations and Warranties True and Correct
 Performance of Obligations
 New Articles
 Execution of New Shareholders Agreement
 5




---



##### 



No Material Adverse Change.
 Selling Shareholder Deliverables
 Provision of Information and Materials.
 SECTION 8 TERMINATION
 Termination of Agreement
   Effect of Termination
 Survival
 SECTION 9 CONFIDENTIALITY
 Confidential Information.
 6




---



##### 



Non-Disclosure.
   SECTION 10 MISCELLANEOUS
 Binding Effect; Assignment
 Governing Law
 Dispute Resolution
 Costs and Expenses
 7




---



##### 



Notices
 (a)
    
    If to the Selling Shareholder,to:YU-CHIA LEEAddress:Facsimile:Telephone:Attention: Mr. YU-CHIA LEE(d)
    
    If to the Purchaser, to:GIGAMEDIA CHINA LIMITEDAddress: 14th Floor, 122 Tunhwa North Road, Taipei 10595, Taiwan R.O.C.Facsimile: 886-2-8770-7576Telephone:886-2-8770-7966Attention: Ms. Jennifer Tseng, General Counsel
 x y A B
 Counterparts
 8




---



##### 



[SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS]
 9




---



##### 



(Signature Page)
  YU-CHIA LEEBy:

/s/
Yu-Chia Lee GIGAMEDIA CHINA LIMITEDBy:

/s/
Arthur WangName: Arthur WangTitle: CEO
# cpsaat45