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

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3059 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3059

  To amend title 35, United States Code, to create an exception from 
  infringement of design patents for certain component parts used to 
                 repair another article of manufacture.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 25, 2009

 Ms. Zoe Lofgren of California (for herself, Mr. Boucher, Ms. Jackson-
    Lee of Texas, Mr. Delahunt, Mr. Cohen, and Mr. Wilson of Ohio) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                             the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend title 35, United States Code, to create an exception from 
  infringement of design patents for certain component parts used to 
                 repair another article of manufacture.

    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 ``Access to Repair Parts Act''.

SEC. 2. EXCEPTION FROM INFRINGEMENT FOR CERTAIN COMPONENT PARTS.

    (a) In General.--Section 271 of title 35, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(j) It shall not be an act of infringement of any design patent 
to make, use, offer to sell, or sell within the United States or import 
into the United States any article of manufacture that itself 
constitutes a component part of another article of manufacture, if the 
sole purpose of the component part is for the repair of the article of 
manufacture of which it is a part so as to restore its original 
appearance.''.
    (b) Applicability.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies to 
acts done on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.2  Certification by the Principal Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002  In connection with the Quarterly Report of Entheos Technologies, Inc. (the Company) on the Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Harmel Rayat, Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  (i) the Report filed by the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (ii) The information contained in that Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company on the dates and for the periods presented therein.  ENTHEOS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.Date: October 25, 2006By:/s/ Harmel RayatHarmel Rayat
Principal Financial Officer  This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version 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.
Exhibit 32.01



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER



I, Gary Herman, certify that:



In connection with the Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q of Tumbleweed Holdings, Inc. for the quarter ended March 31, 2015 (the "Report"), the undersigned officer
of the Company, certifies, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of his knowledge:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: May 20, 2015



|/s/ Gary Herman         | 
|----------------------- | 
|                        | 
|Gary Herman             | 
|Chief Executive Officer |
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Oswald Otero, True Name Oswaldo Otero, Appellant.

[665 NYS2d 888]

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Martin Rettinger, J.), rendered January 9, 1996, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 3 to 6 years, and imposing a mandatory surcharge, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s challenge to the imposition of the surcharge should be raised in the sentencing court by way of a motion for resentencing after the completion of defendant’s sentence *(People v Rada,*160 AD2d 552). Consequently, defendant’s claim is premature *(People v Velasquez,*198 AD2d 25, *lv denied*82 NY2d 932). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Milonas, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.
EXHIBIT 99.3



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

I, Thomas B.  Specketer,  Vice President and  Controller of  MidAmerican  Energy
Company (the "Company"),  certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my knowledge:

     (1)  the Annual  Report on Form 10-K of the Company  for the annual  period
          ended  December  31,  2002  (the  "Report")  fully  complies  with the
          requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act
          of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

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

Dated:   March 25, 2003




                                      /s/ Thomas B. Specketer
                                      -----------------------------
                                      Thomas B. Specketer
                                      Vice President and Controller
                                      (chief financial officer)
```

Exhibit 32.1

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

     In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB (the
"Report") of Quick-Med Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") for the fiscal quarter
ended December 31, 2003, I, David S. Lerner, President, Principal Officer and
Acting Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, to my knowledge, that:

     (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 results of operations of the
Company.

                                         February 17, 2004

                                         /s/ David S. Lerner
                                         Name:  David S. Lerner
                                         Title:  President, Principal Officer,
                                         and Acting Chief Financial Officer
```
Ex-10.5



 





EXHIBIT 10.5




EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT




     This Employment Agreement Amendment (“Amendment”) is made and entered into as of March 31,
2007 (the “Effective Date”) by and between Wright Medical Technology, Inc., a Delaware corporation
(the “Company”), and Jason P. Hood (the “Employee”).



     WHEREAS, the Company and Employee are parties to an Employment Agreement entered into as of
November 22, 2005 (the “Agreement”);



     WHEREAS, the terms of the Agreement provide that it should expire on March 31, 2007; and



     WHEREAS, the parties desire to extend the term of the Agreement for an additional one (1) year
term;



     NOW, THEREFORE, based on the foregoing, and for and in consideration of the mutual covenants
contained herein, the parties, intending to be legally bound, hereby agree as follows:



     1. The Agreement is hereby amended by replacing “March 31, 2007” in Paragraph 7(a) with “March
31, 2008” thereby extending the term of the Agreement for an additional one year period.



     2. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement not specifically amended herein shall
remain in full force and effect.



     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment as of the Effective Date. This
Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an
original, and such counterparts together shall constitute one and the same instrument.



AGREED AND ACCEPTED




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	WRIGHT MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY, INC.	 	 	 	JASON P. HOOD	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:

	 	/s/ Gary D. Henley
 

Gary D. Henley
	 	 	 	/s/ Jason P. Hood
 

	 	 
	 

	 	President and Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Swift Energy
Pension Partners 1994-A, Ltd.'s balance sheet and statement of operations con-
tained in its Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1996 and is qualified in
its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         1,170
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  47,897
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               49,067
<PP&E>                                         2,790,777
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (999,033)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,840,811
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          4,143
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     1,836,668
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1,840,811
<SALES>                                        407,143
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               407,200
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  182,695<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                169,413
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            169,413
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   169,413
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
<FN>
<F1>Includes lease operating expenses, production taxes and depreciation and
depletion and amortization expense.  Excludes general and administrative and
interest expense.
</FN>
        


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 21.1
 SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY
 State ofNames
    
    Incorporation
    
    D/B/A (if applicable)The Healthy Edge, Inc
    
    ArizonaChamberlin Natural Foods, Inc.
    
    Florida
    
    Chamberlins Market CaféHealth Food Associates, Inc.
    
    Oklahoma
    
    Akins Natural Food MarketHawaiian Natural Water Co., Inc
    
    DelawareThe Beverage Group, Inc.
    
    DelawareIdaho
Water 2009, Inc. (Formerly Trinity Springs, Inc.)
    
    Delaware
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Balance
Sheet at September 30, 2000 and the Statement of Income for the Year Ended
September 30, 2000 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           1,148
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   19,527
<ALLOWANCES>                                       784
<INVENTORY>                                     29,397
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                51,280
<PP&E>                                          13,379
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,492
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  72,996
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           23,907
<BONDS>                                         23,907
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            27
<OTHER-SE>                                      16,828
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    72,996
<SALES>                                        466,125
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               466,125
<CGS>                                          410,511
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  410,511
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,048
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,020
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,116
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,904
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,904
<EPS-BASIC>                                     1.43
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.37


</TABLE>
**Exhibit 23.1 – Consent of BDO Seidman, LLP**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

Teletouch Communications, Inc.

Tyler, Texas 

We hereby consent to the incorporation byreference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File No. 333-108946 and File No. 333-108945) of Teletouch Communications, Inc. of our report dated August 4, 2006, relating to the consolidated financial statements and scheduleappearing in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended May 31, 2006. 

/s/ BDO Seidman, LLP

Houston, Texas 

September 11, 2006
**EXHIBIT 21****SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT****Parent**PVF Capital Corp.       **State or Other**    **Jurisdiction of** **Percentage****Subsidiaries (1)** **Incorporation** **Ownership**Park View Federal Savings Bank United States 100%     PVF Service Corporation Ohio 100%     PVF Mortgage Corp. Ohio 100%     PVF Community Development Corp. Ohio 100%     Mid Pines Land Co. Ohio 100%     PVF Holdings Inc. Ohio 100% (1) The assets, liabilities and operations of the subsidiaries are included in the consolidatedfinancial statements contained in the Annual Report to Stockholders included as Exhibit 13 in thisForm 10-K.
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Altair Nanotechnologies Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2009 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), I, Terry M. Copeland, President and CEO of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:





(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 results of operations of the Company.





/s/  Terry
      M. CopelandTerry
      M. Copeland, President and CEO
              November 9, 2009
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6765

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

ERIC PASCAL JACKSON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard, 

Senior District Judge. (4:10-cr-00078-H-1; 4:14-cv-00215-H)

Submitted: March 30, 2017 Decided: April 3, 2017

Before TRAXLER and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Eric Pascal Jackson, Appellant Pro Se. William Glenn Perry, OFFICE 

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Seth Morgan Wood, Assistant United 

States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Eric Pascal Jackson seeks to appeal the district court’s order 

dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The 

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues 

a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). 

A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial 

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the 

merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that 

reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment 

of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. 

McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 

U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on 

procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the 

dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion 

states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. 

Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Jackson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny

Jackson’s motion for appointment of counsel, deny a certificate of 

appealability, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 
3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS No. 10 - 09 - 00298 - CV No. 10 - 09 - 00299 - CV No. 10 - 09 - 00300 - CV No. 10 - 09 - 00301 - CV No. 10 - 09 - 00302 - CV BOBBY RAY CHILDERS , Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

From the 19th District Court McLennan County, Texas Tr ial Court No s . 2007 - 1586 - C1 , 2008 - 165 - C1, 2008 - 462 - C1, 2008 - 463 - C1 and 2008 - 466 - C1

MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant Bobby Ray Childers filed notices of restricted appeal in these five causes relating to orders in the underlying criminal cases for the paymen t of court costs out of Appellant’s inmate account pursuant to Texas Government Code section 501.014.Childers v. State Page 2

The orders being appealed were signed on January 26, 2009. Appellant’s notices of restricted appeal wer e filed on September 14, 2009. In a restricted ap peal, the notice of appeal must be filed within six months after the order is signed. T EX . R. A PP . P. 26.1(c). We notified Appellant by letter that it appeared that we lack jurisdiction over these appeals because timely notices of appeal were not filed a s to the January 26, 2009 orders. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 26.1(a), (c). We further notified Appellant that we would dismiss the appeals for want of jurisdiction unless we received a response showing grounds for continuing the appeals. Appellant filed a resp onse that concedes the untimeliness of his notices of appeal and that presents no basis for continuing the appeals. We dismiss these appeals for lack of jurisdiction. T EX . R. A PP . P. 42.3(a).

REX D. DAVIS Justice Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Reyn a, and Justice Davis Dismissed Opinion delivered and filed November 18, 2009 [CV06]
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John W. SELJAN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-50236.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Jan. 16, 2008.

Michael J. Raphael, Esq., Richard Y. Lee, Esq., USLA-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Criminal Division, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Jerald L. Brainin, Esq., John W. Seljan, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

ORDER

KOZINSKI, Chief Judge:

Upon the vote of a majority of nonre-cused active judges, it is ordered that this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-8012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

ERNEST FREDERICK HODGES, JR.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District 

Judge. (7:05-cr-00040-SGW-1; 7:11-cv-80336-SGW)

Submitted: April 18, 2013 Decided: April 22, 2013

Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ernest Frederick Hodges, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Ronald Andrew 

Bassford, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Ernest Frederick Hodges, Jr., seeks to appeal the 

district court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion 

for reconsideration of the district court’s order denying relief 

on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2012) motion. The order 

is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a 

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). 

A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a 

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the district court denies 

relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by 

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the 

district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is 

debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 

(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). 

When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the 

prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural 

ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable 

claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. 

at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude 

that Hodges has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED