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

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4332-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001]

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Texas (FEMA-4332-DR), dated August 25, 2017, and related determinations.

# DATES:

This amendment was issued September 1, 2017.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Texas is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of August 25, 2017.

Polk, Tyler, and Walker Counties for Individual Assistance and assistance for debris removal and emergency protective measures [Categories A and B], including direct federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Brock Long,

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. 2017-19372 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1

             STATEMENT OF COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS (LOSS) PER SHARE
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                              THREE MONTHS ENDED           SIX MONTHS ENDED
                                                  JUNE 30,                    JUNE 30,
                                          -------------------------   -------------------------
                                             1996           1997          1996          1997
                                          ----------    -----------   -----------   -----------
<S>                                       <C>           <C>            <C>           <C>
Net loss                                  $ (899,000)   $(4,256,000)  $(1,468,000)  $(4,967,000)
                                          ==========    ===========   ===========   ===========
Shares:
  Weighted average number of shares
    outstanding                            3,243,391      5,247,583     3,243,391     4,251,023
  Dilutive effect of options to be
   issued (1)                                365,820        359,223       365,820       362,579
                                          ----------    -----------   -----------   -----------
  Total shares used in computing net
   loss per share                          3,609,211      5,606,806     3,609,211     4,613,602
                                          ==========    ===========   ===========   ===========
 Net loss per share (primary & fully
 dilutive)                                $     (.25)   $      (.76)  $      (.41)  $     (1.08)
                                          ==========    ===========   ===========   ===========
</TABLE>

(1) Reflects the shares of Common Stock issuable to employees related to
    exercisable options that are outstanding under the Equity Appreciation Plan,
    less shares assumed to be repurchased using the treasury stock method.

                                       18
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

          - 26 CFR Part 1
          - [REG-134247-16]
          - RIN 1545-BN73

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of proposed rulemaking; correction.

# SUMMARY:

                        This document contains a correction to a notice of proposed rulemaking (REG-134247-16) that was published in the                         **Federal Register**                         on Friday, January 6, 2017 (82 FR 1645). The notice of proposed rulemaking under section 1441 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (Code) relates to withholding of tax on certain U.S. source income paid to foreign persons and requirements for certain claims for refund or credit of income tax made by foreign persons.                    

# DATES:

This correction is effective September 15, 2017 and is applicable beginning January 6, 2017.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kamela Nelan at (202) 317-6942 (not a toll-free number).

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Background

The notice of proposed rulemaking (REG-134247-16) that is the subject of this correction is under section 1441 of the Code.

## Need for Correction

As published, the notice of proposed rulemaking (REG-134247-16) contains an omission which may prove to be misleading and needs to be corrected.

## Correction of Publication

Accordingly, the notice of proposed rulemaking (82 FR 1645, January 6, 2017) is corrected as follows:

On page 1636, insert the following language after the twenty-third line from the top of the third column:

## “Withdrawal of Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

                    Accordingly, under the authority of 26 U.S.C. 7805, the notice of proposed rulemaking (REG-134361-12) that was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on Thursday, March 6, 2014 (79 FR 12880) is withdrawn.”                

Martin V. Franks,

Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel, (Procedure and Administration).

[FR Doc. 2017-19538 Filed 9-14-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
### IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 09

- 00053

- CV

SIGNAD, LTD

, Appellant

v.

JAMES BRAY

, Appellee

From the 12th District Court

Madison County, Texas

Trial Court No. 08

- 11626

- 012

- 10

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is an appeal from the granting of a motion for summary judgment. We

abated this appeal in order for the trial court to state its intent as to whether or not the

judgment entered was final for purposes of appeal. See Lehmann v. Har

- Con Corp ., 39

S.W.3d 191, 206 (Tex. 2001). The trial cour t has entered an agreed order stating that the

order previously entered by the trial court is not a final judgment for purposes of

appeal. Accordingly, this Court does not have jurisdiction over this appeal. See T EX

. R.

A PP

. P . 42.3(a). Therefore, this appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

TOM GRAY

Chief JusticeSignAd, Ltd. v. Bray Page 2

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Reyna, and

Justice Davis

Dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed April 14, 2010

[CV06]
Exhibit 31.2 CERTIFICATION I, Ronald Rosner, certify that: 1.
I have reviewed
this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Schick Technologies, Inc.;  2.
Based on my
knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light
of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with
respect to the period covered by this report;  3.
Based on my
knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the
periods presented in the report;  4.
The registrants
other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining
disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:  a)
designed such
disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this report is being prepared;  b)
evaluated the
effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; and  c)
disclosed in
this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrants internal control over financial reporting; and  5.
The registrants
other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants
auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or
persons performing the equivalent function):  a)
all significant
deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal
control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect
the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; and  b)
any fraud,
whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a
significant role in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting.  Date:  February 2, 2006 /S/ Ronald Rosner

[Signature]
Director of Finance and Administration
(Principal Financial officer)   16
#### Maria Antonia BARRERA; Saul Jacinto, Petitioners, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 06-74670.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 20, 2007 *.

Filed Dec. 28, 2007.

Edgardo Quintanilla, Esq., Sherman Oaks, CA, for Petitioners.

CAC-District, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Coun*49sel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Hillel Smith Fax, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Anthony W. Norwood, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division/Appellate Section, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Maria Antonia Barrera and Saul Jacinto, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, *Iturribarria v. INS,*321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), and we deny the petition for review.

The BIA provided a sufficiently reasoned basis for its decision and did not abuse its discretion by denying petitioners’ motion to reopen, where the BIA considered the psychological report and country conditions evidence and acted within its broad discretion in determining that the evidence was insufficient to warrant reopening. *See Franco-Rosendo v. Gonzales,*454 F.3d 965, 966-67 (9th Cir.2006); *see also Singh v. INS,*295 F.3d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir.2002) (BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen shall be reversed only if it is “arbitrary, irrational or contrary to law”).

To the extent petitioners contend that the BIA failed to consider some or all of the evidence they submitted with the motion to reopen, they have not overcome the presumption that the BIA did review the record. *See Fernandez v. Gonzales,*439 F.3d 592, 603 (9th Cir.2006).

Petitioners’ contentions regarding voluntary departure are unpersuasive.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA

No. 14

– 0399
Filed January 22, 20 16

UZMA AMIN , Appellant ,

vs.
IOWA DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES , Appellee

.

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Scott D. Rosenberg , Judge.

A challenge to the timeliness of an appeal from a ruling and order by the district court dismissing a case for lack of jurisdiction. APPEAL
DISMISSED.

Alfredo Parrish and Adam Witosky of Parrish Kruidenier Dunn Boles Gribble & Gentry L.L.P., Des Moines , for appellant.

Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Barbara E.B. Galloway, Assistant Attorney General , for appellee.2

PER CURIAM
. Uzma Amin’s petition for judi cial review of an agency action was dismissed by the district court for insufficie nt proof of service. The Iowa
D epartment of Human Services filed a motion to dismiss under Iowa Code section 17A.19(2) (2013) . An order sustaining a motion to dismiss

was e

- filed on February 3, 2014. On February 4, the Electronic Data Management S ystem generated the electronic notice of the order , which
included the “ Official File Stamp: 02

- 03

- 2014:15:16:29.” On March 6, thirty

- one days after the order was filed , Amin file d a notice of appeal , which noted the order’s issuance on February 3. The Iowa Rules of Appellate Procedure require a notice of appeal “be filed within 30 days after the filing of the final order or judgment.” Iowa R. App. P. 6.101(1)( b ). Based on our decision in Concerned Citizens of Southeast Polk School District v. City Development Board , ___ N.W.2d ___ , ___ (Iowa 2015), we find the notice of appeal in this case was untimely and , therefore , dismiss the appeal.
APPEAL DISMISSED. This opi nion shall not be published.
#### In the Matter of John A.J. Hinspeter, Appellant, v Rory J. Bellantoni et al., Respondents.

Submitted December 24, 2007;

decided February 12, 2008

Motion for leave to appeal from the Appellate Division order denying appellant’s motion to vacate dismissed upon the ground that such order does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution.
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION

Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, for the purposes of section 1350 of chapter
63 of title 18 of the United States Code, in his capacity as an officer of SRI/Surgical Express, Inc. (SRI), that, to his knowledge, the Quarterly Report of SRI on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in this report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of SRI.



|                     |  |  |  |     |  |                                               
|-------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------
|Date: August 6, 2007 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ D. Jon McGuire                            
|                     |  |  |  |     |  | D. Jon McGuire                                
|                     |  |  |  |     |  | Sr. Vice President of Strategic Sourcing      
|                     |  |  | 
|Date: August 6, 2007 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Wallace D. Ruiz                           
|                     |  |  |  |     |  | Wallace D. Ruiz                               
|                     |  |  |  |     |  | Sr. Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
III 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 138 

Congratulating the Providence College Men’s Ice Hockey team for winning 

the 2015 NCAA Division I National Championship. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 16, 2015 

Mr. REED (for himself and Mr. WHITEHOUSE) submitted the following 

resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Congratulating the Providence College Men’s Ice Hockey 

team for winning the 2015 NCAA Division I National 

Championship. 

Whereas on Saturday, April 11, 2015, the Providence College 

Friars won the 2015 NCAA Division I Men’s Ice Hockey 

National Championship by defeating the Boston University Terriers by a score of 4 to 3 at TD Garden in Boston, Massachusetts; 

Whereas numbers 16, 10, and 6 scored the first three goals 

for the Friars to keep the game close; 

Whereas the extraordinary goal by number 22 in the third 

period put Providence College in the lead for good; 

Whereas the superb goaltending of number 32 held back Boston University’s scoring attacks and sealed the victory for 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 138 ATS 

the Friars, earning him Most Outstanding Player honors 

of the NCAA Division I Men’s Ice Hockey Tournament; 

Whereas the season-long contributions and dedication of all 

players and coaches of the Friars’ hockey team contributed to this National Championship season; 

Whereas this is the first NCAA Championship for the Providence College Men’s Ice Hockey team; 

Whereas the Providence College Friars finished the season 

with 26 wins and outscored its opponents 19 to 10 in the 

NCAA Division I Men’s Ice Hockey Tournament; and 

Whereas the Providence College Men’s Ice Hockey team became the latest Rhode Island college team to win a National Championship and earn the pride of the State: 

Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) congratulates the Providence College Men’s 

3 Ice Hockey team for winning the 2015 NCAA Divi4 sion I National Championship; 

5 (2) commends the players, coaches, and staff of 

6 the Providence College Men’s Ice Hockey team for 

7 their hard work and dedication in making this the 

8 most successful season in team history; and 

9 (3) recognizes the Providence College students, 

10 alumni, and fans who supported the Men’s Ice 

11 Hockey team in its pursuit of a National Champion12 ship. 

Æ 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
UN PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18

- 2063

GUIQIU GAO

,

Petitioner

,

v.

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General

, Respondent

.

On Petition for Review of a n Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

.

Submitted : June 19, 2019 Decided: July 2, 2019

Before KEENAN

, WYNN

, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges

.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion

.

Dayna Wheatley, WHEATLEY IMMIGRATION LAW, LLC, New Orleans, Louisiana, for Petitioner. Joseph H. Hunt, Assistant Attorney General, Terri J. Scadron, Assistant Director, Leslie McKay, Senior Litigation Counsel, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Divis ion, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE , Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Guiqiu Gao, a native and citizen of the People’s Republic of China, petitions for

review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) denying her motion to

reopen as untimely and numerically barred and for fail ure to set forth a prima facie case

for relief . We have reviewed the administrative record and Gao ’s claims and conclude

that the Boar d did not abuse its discretion in denying her motion. See 8 C.F.R.

§ 1003.2(a) (201 9 ); Mosere v. Mukasey , 552 F.3d 397, 400 (4th Cir. 2009). We

accordingly deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. See In re

Gao (B.I.A. Aug. 10, 2018 ). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument

would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED