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

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2068 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2068

To revive, and extend until January 1, 1999, the suspension of duty on 
                certain narrow fabric weaving machines.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 11, 1993

 Mr. Machtley introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To revive, and extend until January 1, 1999, the suspension of duty on 
                certain narrow fabric weaving machines.

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

SECTION 1. SUSPENSION OF DUTY.

    Heading 9902.84.42 (relating to power-driven weaving machines for 
weaving fabrics not exceeding 30cm in width) of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States is amended by striking out ``12/31/92'' 
and inserting ``12/31/98''.

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    (a) In General.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies with 
respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, 
on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
    (b) Retroactive Application to Termination of Previous 
Suspension.--Notwithstanding section 514 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 
U.S.C. 1514) or any other provision of law, upon proper request filed 
with the appropriate customs officer before the 90th day after the date 
of the enactment of this Act, any entry, or withdrawal from warehouse 
for consumption, of any good described in heading 9902.84.42 of the 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States that was made--
            (1) after December 31, 1992; and
            (2) before the 15th day after the date of the enactment of 
        this Act;
shall be liquidated or reliquidated as though such entry or withdrawal 
occurred on the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.

                                 <all>
```
# FNS Documents & Resources

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

Explore FNS Resources

Compact View

### By Date (1)

                      - 2007(1)

### By Program/Office (29)

                      - (-)Research & Analysis(1)
                      - Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion (CNPP)(8)
                      - Child and Adult Care Food Program(151)
                      - Civil Rights(2)
                      - Commodity Supplemental Food Program(36)
                      - Disaster Assistance(1)
                      - Farmers Market Nutrition Program(15)
                      - Food Distribution & Emergency Assistance(50)
                      - Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations(48)
                      - Food Safety(8)
                      - Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program(17)
                      - Meals for Schools and Childcare(9)
                      - National School Lunch Program(268)
                      - Nutrition Assistance Program (NAP) Block Grants(2)
                      - Nutrition Education & Food Safety(1)
                      - School Breakfast Program(198)
                      - Seniors Farmers Market Nutrition Program(14)
                      - SNAP Employment and Training(6)
                      - Special Milk Program(115)
                      - Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC)(142)
                      - State Systems Office(3)
                      - Summer EBT(4)
                      - Summer Food Service Program(106)
                      - Summer Nutrition Programs(5)
                      - Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)(309)
                      - Team Nutrition(1)
                      - The Emergency Food Assistance Program(60)
                      - The Patrick Leahy Farm to School Program(4)
                      - USDA Foods in Schools(22)

### By Initiatives (0)

### By Topic (0)

### By Audience (2)

                      - Program Operator(1)
                      - State/Local Agency(1)

### By Resource type (2)

                      - Policy(1) - (-)Federal Register Documents(1) - Rules(1)
 
 
                      - Research, Analysis & Background(6)

### By Language (1)

                      - English(1)

Reset

Resource | Final  RuleFinal Rule: Data Collection Related to the Participation of Faith-Based and Community Organizations

This final rule is part of the Department's effort to fulfill its responsibilities under the Faith-Based and Community Initiative pursuant to Executive Orders 13279 and 13280. Under this rule, state agencies will collect and report information related to institutions and organizations that participate in specified Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) nutrition assistance programs.

Page updated: October 14, 2021
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN THE INTEREST OF E. A. R., A

CHILD

,

Appellant

. §

§

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 1 9

- 00 0 70

- C V

Appeal from the

65 th District Court

of El Paso C ounty, Texas

(TC# 2017DCM5786 )

O R D E R

In order to protect the identity of the minor child who is t he subject of this appeal, the

Court has determined on its own motion that it is necessary to identify the child by his i nitials, E

.

E

. R

. , and the parent by i nitials as well, in all papers submitted to the Court, including letters,

motio ns, and briefs. See Tex.R.App.P. 9..8. The Court will also refer to the child a nd parent by

their initials in correspondence, orders, and in its opinion and judgment.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 5 th d ay of March

, 20 1 9

.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure , C.J., R odriguez and Palafox , JJ.
EXHIBIT 31.2








Certification of Chief Financial Officer


I, Stephen T. Wills, certify that:


1.
 I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Palatin Technologies, Inc.; and


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.


Date: August 1, 2016





/s/ Stephen T. Wills


Stephen T. Wills, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer
Exhibit 11


<PAGE>
                        Computation of Net Loss Per Share
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                               Year Ended           Year Ended
                                                             December 31, 1996   December 31, 1995
                                                                                    (pro forma)
<S>                                                            <C>                <C>          
Net loss                                                       $ (2,440,725)       $ (1,482,490)

Loss per common and common equivalent share:

   Weighted average number of shares of common stock
   outstanding during the period after giving effect to the
   one-for-three reverse stock split                              6,231,186           1,382,139

   Common equivalent shares from stock options issued
   during the 12-month period prior to the registration
   statement filing using the treasury stock method                  49,731             198,924

   Conversion of the Series A Convertible Preferred Stock
   using the if-converted method                                       --             4,959,901

   Conversion of the Series B Convertible Preferred Stock
   using the if-converted method                                       --             2,591,613
                                                               ------------        ------------
   Shares used in calculation of net loss per share               6,280,917           9,132,577

   Net loss per common and common equivalent share             $      (0.39)       $      (0.16)
                                                               ============        ============
Loss per common and common equivalent share
   assuming full dilution:

   Weighted average number of shares of common stock
   outstanding during the period after giving effect to the
   one-for-three reverse stock split                              6,280,917                 --

   Series A Convertible Preferred stock prior to conversion       2,686,612                 --

   Series B Convertible Preferred stock prior to conversion       1,321,925                 --
                                                               ------------       ------------
   Weighted average number of common and common
   equivalent shares outstanding - assuming full dilution        10,289,454                 --

   Net loss per common and common equivalent share
   assuming full dilution                                      $      (0.24)                --
                                                               ============       ============
</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 10.34

                             ADDENDUM TO SEPARATION
                             OF EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
                        BETWEEN DAVID DOWSETT (EMPLOYEE)
                         AND THE MED-DESIGN CORPORATION

         This Agreement made this 31st day of May, A.D. 2006 by and between
David Dowsett employee and The Med-Design Corporation.

         WHEREAS, previously The Med-Design Corporation communicated with
Employee in written form and presented to Employee a Separation Agreement and
General Release and related documents. All these documents are incorporated by
reference, reaffirmed and ratified and attached to this document. Said documents
were executed by the Corporation and Employee on 5/17/06.

         WHEREAS, the documentation anticipates that the termination date would
be May 19, 2006 if a favorable vote of Shareholders was secured by that date;
and

         WHEREAS, on May 19, 2006 the Shareholders Meeting was adjourned until
June 2, 2006.

         NOW THEREFORE, with full knowledge of the contents of this Agreement
with the intent to be thereby legally bound Employee and Corporation agree as
follows:

         The document signed by Employee 5/17/06 is hereby ratified and
reaffirmed. The anticipated termination date subject to shareholder approval is
June 2, 2006. Employee has executed said Agreement and the rescission. Provided
by federal, state or local law is by agreement provided to Employee between the
date of signing said document and June 2, 2006. If Company receives no written
notice of rescission prior to June 2, 2006 all said rights are waived and
abandoned by Employee.


 /s/ David Dowsett         
(Employee)

THE MED-DESIGN CORPORATION

BY:  /s/ Lawrence Ellis             
TITLE: C.F.O.
DATE: 5/31/06

MDC RESEARCH LTD.

BY:  /s/ Lawrence Ellis             
TITLE: C.F.O.
DATE: 5/31/06
1 The Honorable Dennis D. O’Brien, United States Bankruptcy Judge for the District of Minnesota. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 02-1067

___________ In re: Larry Kenneth Alexander, * * Debtor, * * ------------------------------------ * Appeal from the United States * Bankruptcy Appellate Panel Larry Kenneth Alexander, * for the Eighth Circuit. * Appellant, * [UNPUBLISHED] * v. * * Mary Jo A. Jensen-Carter, * * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: August 5, 2002 Filed: August 8, 2002

___________ Before LOKEN, BYE, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Larry Kenneth Alexander appeals the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s (BAP’s) order affirming the bankruptcy court’s 1 denial of his motion for relief from judgment-2- under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) and 11 U.S.C. § 105. Alexander also has moved to strike appellee’s addendum and portions of appellee’s brief. Alexander’s Rule 60(b) motion sought relief from a June 1999 bankruptcy court decision disallowing his claimed homestead exemption, which the BAP and Eighth Circuit affirmed. We conclude the bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in denying Alexander relief. See In re Zimmerman , 869 F.2d 1126, 1127- 28 (8th Cir. 1989) (standard of review); Klein v. Arkoma Prod. Co. , 73 F.3d 779, 784 (8th Cir.) (under law-of-case doctrine, every question which appellate court has disposed of by decree is finally settled and determined, and district court is bound to carry decree into execution according to mandate), cert. denied , 519 U.S. 815 (1996); Baker Elec. Co-op., Inc. v. Chaske , 28 F.3d 1466, 1475 (8th Cir. 1994); Ins. Corp. of Ireland, Ltd. v. Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinee , 456 U.S. 694, 702 n.9 (1982). We also deny Alexander’s motion to strike. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
944 A.2d 751

#### Paul SATTERFIELD, and All other Inmates Similarly Situated within the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, now and in the Future, Appellants v. PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; Jeffrey A. Beard, Ph.D.; Secretary of Pennsylvania Department of Corrections; William S. Stickman, Deputy Secretary For Western Region; Michael A. Faman, Chief Counsel; Timothy I. Mark, Deputy Chief Counsel; Robert S. Bitner, Chief Hearing Examiner; Harry E. Wilson, Superintendent of SCI-Fayette; Kerri Cross, Healing Examiner; Carl E. Walker, Program Review Committee; Bradley Newton, Program Review Committee; Robert Stafford, Program Review Committee; Debra Mahimeister, Corrections Classification And Program Manager; Michael Howard, Inmate Employment Officer, Appellees.

No. 23 EAP 2007.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

March 12, 2008.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 12th day of March, 2008, the above-captioned appeal is herewith quashed for failure to file a brief.
FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

SUNSHINE ACT NOTICE

BAC 6735-01

March 25, 2016

TIME AND DATE: 11:00 a.m., Tuesday, April 5, 2016

PLACE: The Richard V. Backley Hearing Room, Room 511N, 1331 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20004 (enter from 

F Street entrance)

STATUS: Open 

MATTERS TO BE 

CONSIDERED: The Commission will consider and act upon the following in open 

session: Secretary of Labor v. Kentucky Fuel Corporation, Docket 

Nos. KENT 2011-1557, et al. (Issues include whether the Judge 

erred in ruling that the Secretary’s issuance of two separate 

citations with regard to the condition of a dozer was not 

impermissibly duplicative.)

Any person attending this meeting who requires special 

accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language 

interpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those 

needs. Subject to 29 C.F.R. § 2706.150(a)(3) and § 2706.160(d).

CONTACT PERSON 

FOR MORE INFO: Emogene Johnson (202) 434-9935 / (202) 708-9300 for TDD

Relay / 1-800-877-8339 for toll free.

__________________________________

Sarah L. Stewart

Deputy General Counsel
|   | EXHIBIT 32.2 |   |
|--------|--------------|--------|

|   |
|--------|

|   | CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIALOFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350 |   |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|

| In connection with the Quarterly Report of Diamond I, Inc. (the "Company") on Form10-QSB/A for the period ending June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, David Loflin, Acting Chief Financial Officerof the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002(subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), that: |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and                               |
|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and result of operations of the Company. |

|   |
|--------|

| Dated: March 20, 2006. | /s/ DAVID LOFLIN |   |
|------------------------|------------------|--------|

|   | David Loflin, Acting Chief FinancialOfficer |   |
|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------|
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATION AND CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000911583
<NAME> STEINWAY MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           12460
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    59963
<ALLOWANCES>                                      7512
<INVENTORY>                                      96527
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                170381
<PP&E>                                           86041
<DEPRECIATION>                                   25847
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  283927
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            42243
<BONDS>                                         111370
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             9
<OTHER-SE>                                       91748
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    283927
<SALES>                                         293251
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                293251
<CGS>                                           194772
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    51893
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  3217
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   401
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               11911
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  31057
<INCOME-TAX>                                     14406
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              16651
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     16651
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.78
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.75
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000
       
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                               2,760
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        6,377
<ALLOWANCES>                                           361
<INVENTORY>                                          6,135
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    15,547
<PP&E>                                               1,431
<DEPRECIATION>                                           0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      17,472
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                3,321
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                            24,661
<OTHER-SE>                                               0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        17,472
<SALES>                                              5,757
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     5,757
<CGS>                                                3,248
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        5,092
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        15
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                         50
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                     50
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                            50
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                          .01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          .01
        

</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Bryant Kelly PRIDE, a/k/a Bryan Kelly Pride, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 10-7278.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Jan. 13, 2011.

Decided: Jan. 20, 2011.

Bryant Kelly Pride, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer R. Bockhorst, Zachary T. Lee, Assistant United States Attorneys, Abingdon, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Bryant Kelly Pride appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his motion for return of property. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *United States v. Pride,*No. 1:07-cr-0020-jpj-mfu-1 (W.D.Va. Aug. 30, 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.*