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

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 695

To authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to make a grant to support research 

to develop enhanced methods for the long-term control and suppression 

of the invasive plant species tamarisk in the Colorado River watershed 

in western Colorado and eastern Utah. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 11, 2003

Mr. MCINNIS (for himself, Mr. TANCREDO, and Mr. BEAUPREZ) introduced 

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture 

A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to make a grant 

to support research to develop enhanced methods for 

the long-term control and suppression of the invasive 

plant species tamarisk in the Colorado River watershed 

in western Colorado and eastern Utah.

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

3 SEC. 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Tamarisk Research 

5 and Control Act of 2003’’. 
2

•HR 695 IH 

1 SEC. 2. GRANT FOR TAMARISK CONTROL RESEARCH AND 

2 RELATED EXTENSION AND EDUCATION EF3 FORTS. 

4 (a) GRANT AUTHORIZED.—The Secretary of Agri5 culture, acting through the Cooperative State Research, 

6 Education, and Extension Service, shall make a grant to 

7 Mesa State College of Grand Junction, Colorado, to sup8 port research and related extension and education efforts 

9 of the college to promote the long-term control and sup10 pression of the invasive plant species tamarisk in the Colo11 rado River watershed in western Colorado and eastern 

12 Utah. 

13 (b) RESEARCH OBJECTIVES.—The principal purpose 

14 of the research to be conducted using the grant funds shall 

15 be the development of enhanced methods that can be used 

16 by individuals or organizations—

17 (1) for tamarisk control and suppression; and 

18 (2) for revegetation and long-term maintenance 

19 of lands reclaimed from tamarisk infestation. 

20 (c) PLAN OF ACTION.—The grant recipient shall sub21 mit to the Secretary a research proposal describing pos22 sible actions to respond to tamarisk infestations and a 

23 plan to manage funding, public support, and other re24 sources. 

25 (d) INVENTORY OF TAMARISK INFESTATION.—Using 

26 a portion of the grant funds, the grant recipient shall con-
3

•HR 695 IH 

1 duct an inventory of tamarisk infestation in the Colorado 

2 River watershed in western Colorado and eastern Utah 

3 and consider the environmental impacts of long-term 

4 tamarisk control. 

5 (e) MATCHING FUNDS REQUIREMENT.—The grant 

6 recipient shall contribute funds toward the research, ex7 tension, and education efforts in an amount equal to the 

8 amount of the grant. 

9 (f) TIME FOR MAKING GRANT.—The Secretary shall 

10 make the grant under this section within one year after 

11 the date on which funds are first made available to the 

12 Secretary to carry out this section. 

13 (g) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is 

14 authorized to be appropriated $1,000,000 to carry out this 

15 section.

Æ
Exhibit 10.26

 

2013 Compensation Information for Registrant’s Executive Officers

 

The table below provides information regarding (i) the base salary of each executive officer of GTx, Inc. (the “Company”), effective as of January 1, 2013, and (ii) the target cash bonus award for each of the Company’s executive officers under the Company’s Executive Bonus Compensation Plan for fiscal 2013, expressed as a percentage of applicable base salary:

 

	
Executive Officer
    	
 
    	
Title
    	
 
    	
2013 Annual
    Base Salary
    ($)
    	
 
    	
2013 Target
   Bonus
    (%)
    	
 
    
	
Mitchell S.   Steiner
    	
 
    	
Chief Executive Officer and Vice-Chairman of   the Board
    	
 
    	
565,110
    	
 
    	
65
    	
 
    
	
Mark E. Mosteller
    	
 
    	
Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and   Treasurer
    	
 
    	
320,856
    	
 
    	
30
    	
 
    
	
Marc S. Hanover
    	
 
    	
President and Chief Operating Officer
    	
 
    	
491,646
    	
 
    	
55
    	
 
    
	
James T. Dalton
    	
 
    	
Vice President, Chief Scientific Officer
    	
 
    	
430,560
    	
 
    	
30
    	
 
    
	
Henry P. Doggrell
    	
 
    	
Vice President, Chief Legal Officer and   Secretary
    	
 
    	
363,576
    	
 
    	
30
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. No. 95-5769

VINCENT B. BEST,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.

Robert D. Potter, Senior District Judge.

(CR-93-216-P)

Submitted: June 19, 1997

Decided: July 3, 1997

Before WILKINS and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER,

Senior Circuit Judge.

_________________________________________________________________

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

G. Alan DuBois, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North

Carolina, for Appellant. Mark T. Calloway, United States Attorney,

Gretchen C. F. Shappert, Assistant United States Attorney,

Charlotte,

North Carolina, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Appellant filed an untimely notice of appeal. Counsel has filed a

brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),

and Appellant has filed a pro se supplemental brief. We dismiss the

appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The time periods for filing

notices of

appeal are governed by Fed. R. App. P. 4. These periods are "mandatory and jurisdictional." Browder v. Director, Dep't of

Corrections,

434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361

U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). A criminal defendant has ten days within

which to file in the district court a notice of appeal from entry

of judgment. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b). The only exception to the appeal period

is when the district court extends the time to appeal for a showing

of

excusable neglect for a period not to exceed thirty days from the

expiration of the time otherwise prescribed by the rule. Fed. R. App.

P.

4(b).

The district court entered its judgment on October 3, 1994; Appellant's notice of appeal was filed on September 14, 1995, which is

beyond the ten-day appeal period. Appellant's failure to note a

timely

appeal or obtain an extension of the appeal period leaves this

court

without jurisdiction to consider the merits of Appellant's appeal.

We

therefore dismiss the appeal and deny Best's motions to file an

amendment to the supplemental brief and for leave to proceed and

amend the supplemental brief.

This Court requires that counsel inform his client, in writing, of

his

right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for

further

review. If the client requests that a petition be filed, but

counsel

believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may

move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel's motion must state a copy thereof was served on the client.

2

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court

and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
                                  MEDQUIST INC.
                             FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE
             AS OF AND FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1997
                  (AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA)
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                         13,300
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  16,711
<ALLOWANCES>                                   378
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               30,071
<PP&E>                                         16,114
<DEPRECIATION>                                 6,903
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 85,334
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          9,800
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       57,647
<OTHER-SE>                                     14,680
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   85,334
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               60,707
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  44,674
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               7,045
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             150
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                8,838
<INCOME-TAX>                                   3,416
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            5,422
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   5,422
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0.48
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.48
        


</TABLE>
EX-10.54



 EXHIBIT 10.54 
 SUMMARY OF ATHERSYS, INC. 
 2013 CASH BONUS INCENTIVE PLAN 

On January 7, 2013, the Board of Directors of Athersys, Inc. (the “Company”), upon the recommendation of the Compensation Committee of the
Board of Directors of the Company, approved a cash bonus incentive plan (the “Plan”) for the year ended December 31, 2013 for the named executive officers of the Company. The Plan provides that each participant is eligible to earn a
bonus during the award term of January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013. The Plan provides for the following target bonus percentages of the named executive officer’s salary during the award term, weighted as set forth below on the
achievement of specified corporate goals, with the remainder based on individual/functional performance. The corporate goals include advancing the Company’s clinical programs for MultiStem, executing against the established operating plan and
capital acquisition objectives, and advancement of strategic partnership and program activities. There is no formally adopted plan document for the Plan. 
  

									
	 Title
	  	Target
Bonus	 	 	Weighting on
Corporate Goals	 
	 Chief Executive Officer
	  	 	40	% 	 	 	100	% 
	 President & Chief Operating Officer
	  	 	33	% 	 	 	80	% 
	 Executive Vice President & Chief Scientific Officer
	  	 	33	% 	 	 	80	% 
	 Executive Vice President, Regenerative Medicine
	  	 	30	% 	 	 	60	% 
	 Vice President of Finance
	  	 	25	% 	 	 	60	%
Case 2:11-cr-00471-KSH Document 30 Filed 12/09/11 Page 1 of 3 PageID: 85
Case 2:11-cr-00471-KSH Document 30 Filed 12/09/11 Page 2 of 3 PageID: 86
Case 2:11-cr-00471-KSH Document 30 Filed 12/09/11 Page 3 of 3 PageID: 87
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-50886

Conference Calendar

__________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

VERNON E. BRUST,

 Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. A-92-CR-195-2

- - - - - - - - - -

June 26, 1996

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Vernon E. Brust, #60336-080, appeals from the district

court's denial of his motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his

sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. He argues that he was

improperly sentenced and that he received ineffective assistance

of counsel. Brust's challenge to his sentence is not cognizable

under § 2255. See United States v. Vaughn, 955 F.2d 367, 368

(5th Cir. 1992). Further, Brust has not demonstrated that his
No. 95-50886

-2-

counsel's performance was deficient. See Strickland v.

Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984). Accordingly, the judgment

of the district court is AFFIRMED.

AFFIRMED.
EX-10.12


 Exhibit 10.12 
 AMENDMENT TO THE HANCOCK HOLDING COMPANY 
 NONQUALIFIED DEFERRED
COMPENSATION PLAN 
 Whereas, Hancock Holding Company maintains the Hancock Holding Company Nonqualified Deferred
Compensation Plan (the “plan”); and 
 Whereas, the Board of Directors of Hancock Holding Company has the
authority to amend the plan pursuant to Section 11; 
 Now, therefore, effective as of the execution date below, the
plan is amended as follows: 
 Section 1.48 shall be added as follows: 

1.48 Valuation. On the last business day of the month following Participant’s Retirement, Separation Date, death, or
Disability, such Participant’s Account shall be valued and the amount due determined, provided that the Account of any Participant who is a Specified Employee shall be valued on the last business day of the month that is at least six months
after such Participant’s Retirement or Separation Date. 
 This amendment was approved by the Board of Directors and was
executed the 1st day of September, 2011. 
  

	
	Hancock Holding Company
	
	 
	By:
	Its:
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 requirement 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 result of
operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods
expressed in the Report.
 Date: May 16, 2011
    By:
    /s/ Edward J. GildeaEdward J. GildeaChief Executive Officer and President
(Principal Executive Officer)
Chart 3-10. Rising proportions of women ages 40 to 54 have 

worked for their current employer for 10 years or longer

22 23

33

43

53 55

9

21

28

37

44

49 49 50

15

51

0

20

40

60

80

30 to 34

years

35 to 39 40 to 44 45 to 49 50 to 54 55 to 59 60 to 64 65 years

and over

1983 2006

SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics

Percent with 10 or more 

years of tenure

Age

Chart 3-10. Rising proportions of women ages 40 to 54 have 

worked for their current employer for 10 years or longer

• Between 1983 and 2006, the proportion of women who have worked for their 

current employer for 10 years or longer increased among those 40 to 54 years 

old. 

• Some of this increase reflects differences in the labor market experiences of 

women in different generations.
##### 



Exhibit 32.2
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (1)
    
    The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarterly period ended
September 30,
2007 (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 results of operation of the Company.
 By:
Name:
    
    /s/ Bryan McGuire

Bryan McGuireTitle:
    
    Chief Financial OfficerDate:
    
    November 14, 2007
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1,000
<CURRENCY>                                       U.S.$
       
<S>                             <C>  
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                  1,000
<CASH>                                         $13,609
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   20,203
<ALLOWANCES>                                       433
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                34,218
<PP&E>                                          18,895
<DEPRECIATION>                                   8,961
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  92,919
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,742
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      81,323
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    92,919
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                27,396
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   20,211
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,872
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  14
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,299
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,655
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,644
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,644
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.24
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.23
        



</TABLE>
[No. 31347-2-II.

Division Two.

November 1, 2005.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Troy Wayne Cramer, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Clark County, No. 02-1-02360-6, John P. Wulle, J., entered January 29, 2004. *Affirmed in part, reversed in part,*and *remanded*by unpublished opinion per Quinn-Brintnall, C.J., concurred in by Bridgewater, J., and Morgan, J. Pro Tem.
Exhibit 99.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                               18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of RDC International,  Inc. (the "Company")
on Form  10-KSB for the period  ending  September  30,  2002,  as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Anthony
Cella,  Chief  Financial  Officer (or the  equivalent  thereof) of the  Company,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

(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/ Anthony Cella
-------------------------
Anthony Cella
Chief Financial Officer (or the equivalent thereof)
January 13, 2003
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1358 

To amend title 13, United States Code, to require that any questionnaire 

used in determining the decennial census of population shall contain 

an option for respondents to indicate citizenship status. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 8, 2019 

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

to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 13, United States Code, to require that 

any questionnaire used in determining the decennial census of population shall contain an option for respondents 

to indicate citizenship status. 

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 ‘‘Citizens Count Census 

5 Act of 2019’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•S 1358 IS

1 SEC. 2. CITIZENSHIP STATUS ON CENSUS QUESTION2 NAIRES. 

3 Section 141 of title 13, United States Code, is 

4 amended— 

5 (1) by redesignating subsection (g) as sub6 section (h); and 

7 (2) by inserting after subsection (f) the fol8 lowing: 

9 ‘‘(g) In conducting the 2020 decennial census and 

10 each decennial census thereafter, the Secretary shall in11 clude in any questionnaire distributed or otherwise used 

12 for the purpose of determining the total population by 

13 States a checkbox or other similar option for respondents 

14 to indicate whether the respondent is a citizen or national 

15 of the United States.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 615 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 615

     To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow the Hope 
  Scholarship Credit to be used for elementary and secondary expenses.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 5, 2003

  Mr. Paul (for himself, Mr. Bartlett of Maryland, Mrs. Musgrave, Mr. 
  Norwood, and Mr. Tancredo) introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow the Hope 
  Scholarship Credit to be used for elementary and secondary expenses.

    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 ``Hope Plus Scholarship Act of 2003''.

SEC. 2. HOPE SCHOLARSHIP CREDIT AVAILABLE FOR ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY 
              EDUCATIONAL EXPENSES.

    (a) In General.--Subsection (f) of section 25A of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new 
paragraph:
            ``(3) Special rule for hope scholarship credit.--In the 
        case of the Hope Scholarship Credit, the term `qualified 
        tuition and related expenses' shall include `qualified 
        elementary and secondary education expenses' (as defined in 
        section 530(b)(4)); except that--
                    ``(A) such term shall include a contribution or 
                gift to the school (other than the home school) at 
                which dependents of the taxpayer are attending, and
                    ``(B) the term `school' shall include a home 
                school.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2003.
                                 <all>
```