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

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 2788 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 22 (legislative day, MARCH 19), 2010 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources 

AN ACT 

To designate a Distinguished Flying Cross National Memorial at the March Field Air Museum in Riverside, California. 

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


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 2788 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Distinguished Flying 

3 Cross National Memorial Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. DESIGNATION OF DISTINGUISHED FLYING CROSS 

5 NATIONAL MEMORIAL IN RIVERSIDE, CALI6 FORNIA. 

7 (a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following: 

8 (1) The most reliable statistics regarding the 

9 number of members of the Armed Forces who have 

10 been awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross indi11 cate that 126,318 members of the Armed Forces re12 ceived the medal during World War II, approxi13 mately 21,000 members received the medal during 

14 the Korean conflict, and 21,647 members received 

15 the medal during the Vietnam War. Since the end 

16 of the Vietnam War, more than 203 Armed Forces 

17 members have received the medal in times of con18 flict. 

19 (2) The National Personnel Records Center in 

20 St. Louis, Missouri, burned down in 1973, and thus 

21 many more recipients of the Distinguished Flying 

22 Cross may be undocumented. Currently, the Depart23 ment of Defense continues to locate and identify 

24 members of the Armed Forces who have received the 

25 medal and are undocumented. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 2788 RFS 

1 (3) The United States currently lacks a na2 tional memorial dedicated to the bravery and sac3 rifice of those members of the Armed Forces who 

4 have distinguished themselves by heroic deeds per5 formed in aerial flight. 

6 (4) An appropriate memorial to current and 

7 former members of the Armed Forces is under con8 struction at March Field Air Museum in Riverside, 

9 California. 

10 (5) This memorial will honor all those members 

11 of the Armed Forces who have distinguished them12 selves in aerial flight, whether documentation of 

13 such members who earned the Distinguished Flying 

14 Cross exists or not. 

15 (b) DESIGNATION.—The memorial to members of the 

16 Armed Forces who have been awarded the Distinguished 

17 Flying Cross that is under construction at March Field 

18 Air Museum in Riverside, California, is hereby designated 

19 as the Distinguished Flying Cross National Memorial. 

20 (c) EFFECT OF DESIGNATION.—The national memo21 rial designated by this section is not a unit of the National 

22 Park System, and the designation of the national memo23 rial shall not be construed to require or permit Federal 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
4 

HR 2788 RFS 

1 funds to be expended for any purpose related to the na2 tional memorial. 

Passed the House of Representatives March 19, 

2010. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

 

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer of Optimal Group Inc. (the “Company”), does hereby certify that to the best of the undersigned’s knowledge:

 

|   | 1) | the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 (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 operations of the Company. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| Dated: | August 6, 2008 |
|--------|----------------|

 

 

|   | By: | /s/ Gary S. Wechsler |
|--------|-----|----------------------|

|   | Gary S. Wechsler |
|--------|------------------|

|   | Treasurer and |
|--------|---------------|

|   | Chief Financial Officer |
|--------|-------------------------|

 

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as part of this report or as a separate disclosure document.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                      5
<CIK>                          0000860745
<NAME>                         GEODYNE ENERGY INCOME LTD PARTNERSHIP III-A

<S>                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                   DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                            379,613
<SECURITIES>                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                     325,691
<ALLOWANCES>                            0
<INVENTORY>                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                  705,304
<PP&E>                         15,787,198
<DEPRECIATION>                 13,978,347
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  2,793,806
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>              80,854
<BONDS>                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                             0
<COMMON>                                0
<OTHER-SE>                      2,662,900
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    2,793,806
<SALES>                         2,071,981
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                2,082,984
<CGS>                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   1,311,185
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                   771,799
<INCOME-TAX>                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>               771,799
<DISCONTINUED>                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0
<CHANGES>                               0
<NET-INCOME>                      771,799
<EPS-BASIC>                          2.72
<EPS-DILUTED>                           0



</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 192 (Thursday, October 5, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 46606]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-21501]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration


Notice of Opportunity for Public Comment on Surplus Property 
Release at Greenville SCTAC Airport, Greenville, South Carolina

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Notice is being given that the Federal Aviation Administration 
(FAA) is considering a request from the City and County of Greenville 
to waive the requirement that one parcel (350.285 acres) of surplus 
property, located at the Greenville SCTAC Airport be used for 
aeronautical purposes. Currently, ownership of the property provides 
for protection of FAR Part 77 surfaces and compatible land use.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 6, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Documents are available for review by prior appointment at 
the following location: Atlanta Airports District Office, Attn: Anna 
Lynch, Program Manager, 1701 Columbia Ave., Room 220, College Park, 
Georgia 30337-2747, Telephone: (404) 305-6746.
    Comments on this notice may be mailed or delivered in triplicate to 
the FAA at the following address: Atlanta Airports District Office, 
Attn: Anna Lynch, Program Manager, 1701 Columbia Ave., Room 220, 
College Park, Georgia 30337-2747.
    In addition, one copy of any comments submitted to the FAA must be 
mailed or delivered to Danny Moyd, Director of Properties, SCTAC at the 
following address: South Carolina Technology & Aviation Center SCTAC, 2 
Exchange Street, Greenville, South Carolina 29605.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anna Lynch, Program Manager, Atlanta 
Airports District Office, 1701 Columbia Ave., Room 220, College Park, 
Georgia 30337-2747, (404) 305-6746. The application may be reviewed in 
person at this same location.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA is reviewing a request by the City 
and County of Greenville to release one parcel of surplus property 
(350.285 acres) at the Greenville SCTAC Airport. The parcel was 
originally conveyed to the City and County of Greenville on January 
1964 under the powers and authority contained in the provisions of the 
Surplus Property Act of 1944. The City and County of Greenville will 
retain ownership of this parcel while establishing a land lease for any 
non aeronautical development.
    Any person may inspect the request in person at the FAA office 
listed above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    In addition, any person may, upon request, inspect the request, 
notice and other documents germane to the request in person at the 
Greenville SCTAC Airport.

    Issued in Atlanta, Georgia, on September 20, 2017.
Larry F. Clark,
Manager, Atlanta Airports District Office, Southern Region.
[FR Doc. 2017-21501 Filed 10-4-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
#### In the Matter of Felton R. Fort, Petitioner, v Brian Fischer, as Commissioner of Correctional Services, Respondent.

[862 NYS2d 386]

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Correction officers advised petitioner that he had to move to the top bunk of his prison cell. Claiming that a medical condition prevented him from doing so, petitioner refused. After it was determined that petitioner had no such medical condition that would preclude him from moving, he was charged in a misbehavior report with disobeying a direct order, lying and violating facility movement regulations. A tier III disciplinary hearing ensued, at the conclusion of which petitioner was found guilty of all three charges. That determination was administratively affirmed and this CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.

We confirm. The detailed misbehavior report, together with the hearing testimony from a prison doctor who indicated that there was no documented medical reason why petitioner could not have moved to the top bunk, comprise substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt *(see Matter of Wilson v Goord,*47 AD3d 1102, 1102-1103 [2008]). Petitioner’s contradictory testimony regarding his health presented a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve *(see Matter of Rosa v Brown,*47 AD3d 1142, 1143 [2008]). Petitioner’s remaining contentions have been examined and found to be unavailing.

Mercure, J.P, Peters, Rose, Malone Jr. and Kavanagh, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED> 
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1998             JAN-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-31-1997             FEB-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-1997             OCT-31-1997
<CASH>                                          12,670                   3,819
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,482                  15,151
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,700                     891
<INVENTORY>                                        436                   1,527
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                20,075                  19,876
<PP&E>                                          24,082                  45,324
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,119                   7,092
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  38,881                  58,108
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,367                  17,897
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                            74                      75
<OTHER-SE>                                      34,958                  38,879
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    39,095                  58,108
<SALES>                                          1,420                  15,391
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 5,536                  26,292
<CGS>                                              981                  12,666
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,023                  17,532
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,805                   2,189
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   289                     709
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  17                     207
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,620                   7,389
<INCOME-TAX>                                       897                   2,503
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,723                   4,886
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,723                   4,886
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .28                     .70
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .28                     .67
        

</TABLE>
#### Michelle MAUPIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HOWARD COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM; Howard County Board of Education; Restia Whitaker, individually and in his official capacity; Christian J. Callender, individually and in his official capacity; John L. Seibel, individually and in his official capacity; Robyn McDonald, individually and in her official capacity, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 10-1895.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 24, 2011.

Decided: April 1, 2011.

As Amended on Denial of Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc May 18, 2011.

Michelle Maupin, Appellant Pro Se. Edmund J. O’Meally, Lisa Y. Settles, Hodes, Pessin & Katz, PA, Towson, Maryland, for Appellees.

Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Michelle Maupin appeals the magistrate judge’s order granting summary judgment for the defendants.* We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Maupin v. Howard Cnty. Bd. of Edue.,*No. 1:08-cv02203-BPG (D.Md. July 15, 2010). 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.

*AFFIRMED.*

*

 This case was decided by a magistrate judge with the parties' consent pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2006).
**Exhibit 11****Calculationof Net Income (Loss) per Share**
                                                  **2004****2005****Three Months Ended****Six Months Ended****Three Months Ended****Six Months Ended****June 30,****June 30,****June 30,****June 30,****Net****Per Share****Net****Per Share****Net****Per Share****Net****Per Share****Income****Shares****Amount****Loss****Shares****Amount****Loss****Shares****Amount****Loss****Shares****Amount****(Inthousands, except per share data)****(Inthousands, except per share data)****(Inthousands, except per share data)**Basic EPS                                         Net income (loss) available to common shareholders     $1,314   24,381  $(0.05) $(240)  24,325  $(0.01) $(8,140)  24,425  $(0.33)  $(11,862)  24,461  $(0.48)                                           Effect of Dilutive Securities                                         Stock option plans          900           —           —            —                                                    Dilutive EPS                                         Net income (loss) available to common    shareholders and assumed conversions     $1,314   25,281  $(0.05) $(240)  24,325  $(0.01) $(8,140)  24,425  $(0.33)  $(11,862)  24,461  $(0.48)                                      
     NOTE: Options to    purchase 5.1 million    shares of Class A Common Stock were outstanding during the    six months ended June 30, 2004, but    were not included in the computation of diluted earnings per    share because the effect would have been anti-dilutive. Options    to purchase 3.4 million shares of    Class A Common Stock were outstanding during the six months ended June 30, 2005, but were not    included in the computation of diluted earnings per share    because the effect would have been anti-dilutive. 
2
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Hermino Correa, Appellant.

[858 NYS2d 640]

Appeal from a judgment of the Onondaga County Court (Anthony E Aloi, J.), rendered July 17, 2006. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted burglary in the third degree. It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of attempted burglary in the third degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 140.20). Defendant failed to move to withdraw the plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction and thus failed to preserve for our review his contention that the plea was not knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently entered *(see People v Aguayo,*37 AD3d 1081 [2007], *lv denied*8 NY3d 981 [2007]; *People v Jenkins,*37 AD3d 1087 [2007], *lv denied*8 NY3d 946 [2007]). In any event, that contention lacks merit. “[Defendant’s] responses to the questions of [County C]ourt during the plea colloquy did not negate any element of the offense or otherwise cast any doubt on defendant’s guilt” *(People v Spikes,*28 AD3d 1101, 1102 [2006], *lv denied*7 NY3d 818 [2006]; *see People v Williams,*35 AD3d 1273, 1274 [2006], *lv denied*8 NY3d 928 [2007]). Present—Smith, J.P, Centra, Fahey, Peradotto and Pine, JJ.
**EXHIBIT31.2**

 

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEFFINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 302

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002

 

I, Ulrich Gottschling, certify that:

 

1.             I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q of SRS Labs, Inc.;

 

2.             Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.             Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.             The registrant’sother certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a)     Designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisannual report is being prepared;

 

c)     Evaluated the effectivenessof the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

 

d)    Disclosed in this report anychange in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s first fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2006that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.             The registrant’sother certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):

 

a)     All significant deficienciesand material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and

 

b)    Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting.

 

 
| Dated: May 11,  2006 |   |                    |
|----------------------|--------|-------------------------|
|                 |   | /S/ Ulrich Gottschling  |
|                 |   | Ulrich Gottschling      |
|                 |   | Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
Order entered October 27, 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05
- 14
- 00889
- CV
THE SHOPS AT LEGACY (INLAND) LIMITED PAR TNERSHIP, Appellant
V. FINE AUTOGRAPHS & ME MORABILIA RETAIL STO RES, INC., Appellee On Appeal from t he 366th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 366
- 02102
- 2010 

### O RDER
W e GRANT appellee’s October 15, 2014 motion to transfer record and ORDER the clerk’s record and reporter’s record filed in appellate cause number 05

- 12

- 00864

- CV, styled “The Shops at Legacy (Inland) Limited Partnership v. Fine Autographs & Memorabilia Retail Stores Inc.,” transferred into this appeal

.
/s/ ADA BROWN JUSTICE
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 USC, SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION
                     906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


      In connection with the Quarterly Report of Renhuang Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended April 30, 2006, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Leo Wang, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


Dated:  August 14, 2006                    /s/ Leo Wang
                                          -----------------------------
                                          By: Leo Wang
                                          Its: Chief Financial Officer


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