alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Rasheen D. Robinson, Appellant.

[852 NYS2d 893]

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law § 220.39 [1]). Contrary to the contention of defendant, his constitutional right to *1270a speedy trial was not violated by the 16-month period between the date of his arrest and the entry of his plea *(see generally People v Taranovich,*37 NY2d 442, 444-445 [1975]; *People v Manuel,*39 AD3d 1185, 1186 [2007], *lv denied*9 NY3d 878 [2007]). The 16-month period primarily was caused by County Court’s delay in issuing an order determining defendant’s omnibus motion and by court congestion *(see People v Cartledge,*147 AD2d 917 [1989], *lv denied*74 NY2d 662 [1989]), and we note in addition that defendant’s incarceration during that period of time was attributable in part to unrelated charges *(see People v Jenkins,*2 AD3d 1390 [2003]).

Contrary to the further contention of defendant, he was not eligible to be sentenced pursuant to the 2004 Drug Law Reform Act ([DLRA] L 2004, ch 738) because he committed the instant offense on May 6, 2004, prior to the date on which the DLRA became effective *(see People v Utsey,*7 NY3d 398, 403 [2006]; *see also People v Moore,*38 AD3d 1313 [2007], *lv denied*9 NY3d 848 [2007]). Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention concerning his appearance in shackles before the grand jury *(see People v Abron,*37 AD3d 1163 [2007], *lv denied*8 NY3d 980 [2007]; *see also People v Winfield,*267 AD2d 486 [1999], *lv denied*94 NY2d 927, 95 NY2d 806 [2000]), as well as his contention concerning his alleged inability to confer with defense counsel during the grand jury proceeding *(see People v Baker,*294 AD2d 888, 889 [2002], *lv denied*98 NY2d 708 [2002]), and we decline to exercise our power to review those contentions as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice *(see*CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). Present—Scudder, P.J., Martoche, Smith, Green and Gorski, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 741 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 741

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow the deduction for 
 health insurance costs of self-employed individuals to be allowed in 
                    computing self-employment taxes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 12, 2003

 Ms. Loretta Sanchez of California (for herself, Mr. Crowley, 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 deduction for 
 health insurance costs of self-employed individuals to be allowed in 
                    computing self-employment taxes.

    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 ``Self-Employed Health Equity 
Adjustment to Lower Tax Hindrance Act''.

SEC. 2. ALLOWANCE OF HEALTH INSURANCE DEDUCTION FOR SELF-EMPLOYED 
              INDIVIDUALS FOR PURPOSES OF SELF-EMPLOYMENT TAX.

    (a) In General.--Section 162(l) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 (relating to special rules for health insurance costs of self-
employed individuals) is amended by striking paragraph (4) (relating to 
deduction not allowed for self-employment tax purposes) and 
redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (4).
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2003.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 99.1



                                CERTIFICATION OF
                             CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                           OF VALENCE TECHNOLOGY, INC.


     This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and accompanies the quarterly report on Form 10-Q
(the "Form 10-Q") for the quarter ended December 31, 2002 of Valence Technology,
Inc. (the "Issuer").

     I, Stephan B. Godevais, the Chief Executive Officer of the Issuer, certify
that to the best of my knowledge:

     (i)  the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
          Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a)
          or 78o(d)); and

     (ii) the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Issuer.

Dated:   February 14, 2002.


                                                 /S/ STEPHAN B. GODEVAIS
                                                 ------------------------------
                                                 Name:  Stephan B. Godevais



<PAGE>



                                CERTIFICATION OF
                           PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                           OF VALENCE TECHNOLOGY, INC.


     This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and accompanies the quarterly report on Form 10-Q
(the "Form 10-Q") for the quarter ended December 31, 2002 of Valence Technology,
Inc. (the "Issuer").

     I, Kevin W. Mischnick, the Vice President of Finance (the Principal
Financial Officer) of the Issuer, certify that to the best of my knowledge:

     (i)  the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
          Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a)
          or 78o(d)); and

     (ii) the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Issuer.

Dated:  February 14, 2002.


                                                /S/ KEVIN W. MISCHNICK
                                                -------------------------------
                                                Name:  Kevin W. Mischnick
##### 



EXHIBIT 99.7
 THE WESTAIM CORPORATION
 Chief Financial Officers Certification
Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this report on Form 40-F for the period ended December 31, 2005 of The
Westaim Corporation;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; andc)
    
    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 registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
function):
 1




---



##### 



EXHIBIT 99.7
 a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; andb)
    
    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/ G.A. (Drew) Fitch

Name: G.A. (Drew) FitchTitle: Senior Vice President andChief Financial Officer
 2
# Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed March 13, 2019.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D18-2512

Lower Tribunal Nos. 11-27843; 11-30828

________________



### Roberto Duggans

, Appellant,

vs.



### The State of Florida

, Appellee.

An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the

Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Eric William Hendon, Judge.

Roberto Duggans, in proper person.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before SALTER, LINDSEY and MILLER, JJ.

MILLER, J.Appellant seeks review of the trial court's denial of his “Motion to Correct

an Illegal Sentence,” filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.

On November 9, 2018, in accordance with the mailbox rule, appellant filed his

relevant notice of appeal. 1 The notice of appeal incorrectly states the lower court

rendered the order appealed on October 10, 2018. Applying Florida Rule of

Appellate Procedure 9.020(h), 2 we determine the lower court rendered the order

under appeal on September 28, 2018, as the trial court’s signed, written order

denying the motion to correct illegal sentence was filed with the lower court clerk

on that date. We reach this conclusion based on the lower court clerk’s filing

stamp, dated September 28, 2018.

Because the notice of appeal was filed more than 30 days after rendition of

the order, this court is without appellate jurisdiction. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.110(b);

see also Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(k). Thus, we dismiss this appeal for lack of

1 The mailbox rule provides a motion, petition, or notice of appeal is deemed

“filed” when an inmate places it in the hands of prison officials. Haag v. State

, 591

So. 2d 614, 617 (Fla. 1992). As articulated in Thompson v. State

, 761 So. 2d 324,

326 (Fla. 2000), we presume timeliness, of the filing of a legal document submitted

by an inmate, according to the date contained in the certificate of service, if any,

showing that the pleading was placed in the hands of prison or jail officials for

mailing on that date, provided said date is on or before the filing deadline.

2 Fla. R. App. P. 9.020(h)

– Rendition (of an Order). An order is rendered when

a signed, written order is filed with the clerk of the lower tribunal. See In re

Amendments to the Fla. R. App P.

, 256 So. 3d 1218 (Fla. 2018) (adopting

amendments to the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, relettering subdivision (i)

of rule 9.020 to (h)); see also Guy v. Plaza Home Mortg., Inc., 260 So. 3d 280 (Fla.

4th DCA 2018).

2jurisdiction, without prejudice for the filing of a petition for belated appeal

pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(c). See, e.g.

, Watkins v.

State

, 217 So. 3d 1135 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017).

Dismissed.

3
H. Res. 310

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

July 9, 2003.

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule

XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of

the bill (H.R. 2211) to reauthorize title II of the Higher

Education Act of 1965. The first reading of the bill shall be

dispensed with. General debate shall be confined to the bill

and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled

by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce. After general debate

the bill shall be considered for amendment under the fiveminute rule. It shall be in order to consider as an original

bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule

the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by

the Committee on Education and the Workforce now printed

in the bill. The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. All points of order against

the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute are
2

•HRES 310 EH

waived. No amendment to the committee amendment in the

nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed

in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this

resolution. Each amendment may be offered only in the order

printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided

and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not

be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the

Committee of the Whole. All points of order against such

amendments are waived. At the conclusion of consideration of

the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report

the bill to the House with such amendments as may have

been adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in

the House on any amendment adopted in the Committee of

the Whole to the bill or to the committee amendment in the

nature of a substitute. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final

passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Attest:

Clerk.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         863,977
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,704,931
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (37,000)
<INVENTORY>                                    261,790
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,430,463
<PP&E>                                       6,348,567
<DEPRECIATION>                                (897,022)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,305,090
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,826,962
<BONDS>                                      5,578,283
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,329
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,897,516
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,305,090
<SALES>                                      5,464,720
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,464,720
<CGS>                                        4,102,482
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,182,657
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                29,644
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   150,037
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .06
        

</TABLE>
No. 1123.

#### Hartzberg et al., doing business as J. & L. Hartzberg, *v.*New York Central Railroad Co.

May 20, 1946.

*Henry H. Shepard*and *Joseph M. Proskauer*for petitioners.

*Frederick L. Wheeler*and *C. Austin White*for respondent.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of New York, County of New York, denied.
NEW PERSPECTIVE FUND, INC.
                            333 South Hope Street
                        Los Angeles, California 90071
                          Telephone  (213) 486-9200

February 20, 2002

Document Control
Division of Investment Management
Securities and Exchange Commission
Judiciary Plaza
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20001


      Re:   New Perspective Fund, Inc.
            File Nos. 2-47749
                      811-2333

Dear Sir or Madam:

  Pursuant to Rule 497(j), I hereby certify that no changes have been made to
the form of prospectus and Statement of Additional Information since the
electronic filing on 2/14/02 of Registrant's Post-Effective Amendment No. 55
under the Securities Act of 1933 and Amendment No. 38 under the Investment
Company Act of 1940.

      Sincerely,
      /s/ Vincent P. Corti
      Vincent P. Corti
      Secretary

/vpc

Enclosure

cc: Linda Stirling
IV 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 262

Supporting the goals and ideals of Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 9, 2003

Mr. PLATTS submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Government Reform 

RESOLUTION

Supporting the goals and ideals of Pancreatic Cancer 

Awareness Month.

Whereas over 30,700 people will be diagnosed with pancreatic 

cancer this year in the United States; 

Whereas the mortality rate for pancreatic cancer is 99 percent, the highest of any cancer; 

Whereas pancreatic cancer is the 4th most common cause of 

cancer death for men and women in the United States; 

Whereas there are no early detection methods and minimal 

treatment options for pancreatic cancer; 

Whereas when symptoms of pancreatic cancer generally 

present themselves, it is too late for an optimistic prognosis, and the average survival rate of those diagnosed 

with metastasis disease is only 3 to 6 months; 
2

•HRES 262 IH 

Whereas pancreatic cancer does not discriminate by age, gender, or race, and only 4 percent of patients survive beyond 5 years; 

Whereas the Pancreatic Cancer Action Network (PanCAN), 

the only national advocacy organization for pancreatic 

cancer patients, facilitates awareness, patient support, 

professional education, and advocacy for pancreatic cancer research funding, with a view to ultimately developing 

a cure for pancreatic cancer; and 

Whereas the Pancreatic Cancer Action Network has requested that the Congress designate November as Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month in order to educate 

communities across the Nation about pancreatic cancer 

and the need for research funding, early detection methods, effective treatments, and prevention programs: Now, 

therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives supports 

2 the goals and ideals of Pancreatic Cancer Awareness 

3 Month.

Æ
Exhibit 13.2




CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED


PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Lior Shemesh, as Chief Financial Officer of Alvarion Ltd. (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:




(1)  The accompanying Annual Report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission  (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and




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




Dated: June 9, 2011




/s/ Lior Shemesh

Lior Shemesh

Chief Financial Officer




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.
IV 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 321

Stating the agreement of the House of Representatives with the sentiment 

expressed by the Senate in Senate Resolution 191. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 16, 2003

Mr. DEMINT (for himself, Mr. CLYBURN, Mr. SPRATT, Mr. WILSON of South 

Carolina, Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina, and Mr. BROWN of South 

Carolina) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on House Administration 

RESOLUTION

Stating the agreement of the House of Representatives with 

the sentiment expressed by the Senate in Senate Resolution 191.

Whereas the Honorable J. Strom Thurmond conducted his 

life in an exemplary manner, an example to all of his fellow citizens; 

Whereas Strom Thurmond served South Carolina in the 

United States Senate with devotion and distinction; 

Whereas Strom Thurmond was a devoted husband, father, 

and grandfather; 

Whereas Strom Thurmond served his country during World 

War II, fighting the greatest threat the world had then 

seen; 
2

•HRES 321 IH 

Whereas Strom Thurmond gave a great measure of his life 

to public service; 

Whereas his service to South Carolina and to the Nation 

earned him the esteem and high regard of his colleagues; 

and 

Whereas the news of Strom Thurmond’s death on June 26, 

2003 was heard with profound sorrow: Now, therefore, be 

it

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives agrees 

2 with the sentiment expressed by the Senate in Senate Res3 olution 191.

Æ
### STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS 

### ANTHONY THOMAS DIFALCO Alk

NO. 

### 2023 KW 0850 

## OCTOBER23, 2023
In Re: 

### Anthony Thomas Difalco, 

### applying 

### for supervisory writs, 

### 22nd Judicial District Court, Parish of 

### St. 

### Tammany, No. 

### 605037. BEFORE: WELCH, HOLDRIDGE, ANDWOLFE, JJ.

WRITDENIED. JEW GH EW