alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA Cause	No.: **DA	20 -**  **0188 STATE	OF	MONTANA,** 

Plaintiff	and	Appellee , v. **BRANDON	MICHAEL	BAILEY ,** 

Defendant	and	Appellant . **ORDER GRANTING TWO WEEK**  **EXTENSION OF TIME** 

**UPON** Appellant ’s Motion for T wo	Week Day	Extension	to	File	Opening	Brief , and good	cause	appearing, **IT	IS	HEREBY	ORDERED** that	the Appellant ’s motion is **GRANTED** . **IT	IS	FURTHER	ORDERED** that the deadline for	Appellant	to	submit	h is Opening Brief is	now July	2,	2020 . DATED	this _____	day	of June,	2020 .

_______________________________ SUPREME	COURT	JUSTICE

Electronically signed by: Bowen Greenwood Clerk of the Supreme Court June 18 2020

06/18/2020

Case Number: DA 20-0188
IIA

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2632

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER 14 (legislative day, OCTOBER 13), 1993

Received

AN ACT

To authorize appropriations for the Patent and Trademark

Office in the Department of Commerce for fiscal year 1994.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Patent and Trademark

5 Office Authorization Act of 1993’’.
2

•HR 2632 RDS

1 SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF AMOUNTS AVAILABLE TO THE

2 PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE.

3 (a) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is

4 authorized to be appropriated to the Patent and Trade5 mark Office for salaries and necessary expenses the sum

6 of $103,000,000 for fiscal year 1994, to be derived from

7 deposits in the Patent and Trademark Office Fee Sur8 charge Fund established under section 10101 of the Om9 nibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (35 U.S.C. note).

10 (b) FEES.—There are also authorized to be made

11 available to the Patent and Trademark Office for fiscal

12 year 1994, to the extent provided in advance in appropria13 tion Acts, such sums as are equal to the amount collected

14 during such fiscal year from fees under title 35, United

15 States Code, and the Trademark Act of 1946 (15 U.S.C.

16 1051 and following).

17 SEC. 3. AMOUNTS AUTHORIZED TO BE CARRIED OVER.

18 Amounts appropriated or made available pursuant to

19 this Act may remain available until expended.

20 SEC. 4. ADJUSTMENT OF TRADEMARK FEES.

21 Effective on the date of the enactment of this Act,

22 the fee under section 31(a) of the Trademark Act of 1946

23 (15 U.S.C. 1113(a)) for filing an application for the reg24 istration of a trademark shall be $245. Any adjustment
3

•HR 2632 RDS

1 of such fee under the second sentence of such section may

2 not be effective before October 1, 1994.

Passed the House of Representatives October 12,

1993.

Attest: DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

Clerk.
Exhibit
3.2 PACIFIC OFFICE PROPERTIES
TRUST, INC.
  ARTICLES
SUPPLEMENTARY
 
 
 Pacific Office Properties Trust, Inc.,
a Maryland corporation (the “Corporation”), hereby certifies to the State
Department of Assessments and Taxation of Maryland that:
 
 FIRST:  Under
a power contained in Section 6.2 of Article VI of the charter of the Corporation
(the “Charter”), the Board of Directors of the Corporation (the “Board of
Directors”) reclassified and designated 199,900 authorized but unissued shares
(the “Shares”) of Class B Common Stock, $.0001 par value per share, of the
Corporation as authorized but unissued shares of Common Stock, $.0001 par value
per share, of the Corporation (the “Common Stock”).
 
 SECOND:  A
description of the Common Stock is contained in Section 6.2 of Article VI of the
Charter.
 
 THIRD:  The
Shares have been reclassified and designated by the Board of Directors under the
authority contained in the Charter.
 
 FOURTH:  These
Articles Supplementary have been approved by the Board of Directors in the
manner and by the vote required by law.
 
 FIFTH:  The
undersigned Chairman of the Board acknowledges these Articles Supplementary to
be the corporate act of the Corporation and, as to all matters or facts required
to be verified under oath, the undersigned Chairman of the Board acknowledges
that, to the best of his knowledge, information and belief, these matters and
facts are true in all material respects and that this statement is made under
the penalties for perjury.
 
 *           *           *
  
  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Corporation has
caused these Articles Supplementary to be signed in its name and on its behalf
by its Chairman of the Board and attested to by its Corporate Secretary, on this
20th day of November, 2009.
 
 ATTEST:                                                                            PACIFIC OFFICE
PROPERTIES TRUST,
 INC.
 
 
 
 /s/ Tamara
Edwards                                           By:  /s/ Jay H.
Shidler___________
 Name:  Tamara
Edwards                                                                                   Name:  Jay
H. Shidler
 Title:  Corporate
Secretary                                                                               Title:  Chairman
of the Board
DDido y yoou kno u know w ther whe i

arch e f

f

oods oods 

yoyu ou shshoouuld ld a

avvoid oid during during 

prpegna regncny anto pr cy otec to pt yroourself tect 

from listeriosis? yourself from listeriosis? 

What is listeriosis? 

Listeriosis is a serious infection, usually 

caused by eating food contaminated with 

the bacterium Listeria monocytogenes. 

Why are pregnant women at particular

risk for listeriosis? 

 

It’s the 3rd leading cause of death from 

food poisoning. 

Food Safety for Pregnant Women 

How can I prevent 

listeriosis? 

Learn which foods you should 

avoid to reduce risks of 

listeriosis. 

FoodSafety.gov-Listeria 

What is the government doing to 

combat Listeria? 

Listeria monocytogenes in Retail Delicatessens 

Check your steps
DENIED and Opinion Filed August 30, 2023 

# S

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-23-00763-CV IN RE STATE FARM MUTUAL AU TOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY AND LINDSEY NICOLE DESSART, Relators Original Proceeding from the County Court at Law No. 6 Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 006-03203-2022 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Partida-Kipness, Carlyle, and Garcia Opinion by Justice Partida-Kipness In their August 2, 2023 petition for writ of mandamus, relators challenge the trial court’s denial of relators’ motion for severance and abatement. Entitlement to mandamus relief requires re lators to show that the trial court clearly abused its discretio n and that relators lack an adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. , 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). After reviewing relators’ petiti on and the record before us, we conclude that relators have failed to demons trate entitlement to mandamus relief. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 52.8(a).–2– We also lift the stay issued by this Court’s August 22, 2023 Order.

Garcia, J., would have requested a response.
230763F.P05 /Robbie Partida-Kipness / ROBBIE PARTIDA-KIPNESS JUSTICE
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2755 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2755

       To suspend until January 1, 1998, the duty on fluvoxamine.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 27, 1993

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
       To suspend until January 1, 1998, the duty on fluvoxamine.

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

SECTION 1. FLUVOXAMINE.

    Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of 
the United States is amended by inserting in numerical sequence the 
following new heading:

      

       ``  9902.31.12  Fluvoxamine (provided for in subheading 3004.90.60)......  Free             No change        No change        On or before 12/   
                                                                                                                                      31/97           ''

SEC. 2. APPLICABILITY.

    (a) In General.--The amendment made by section 1 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 Provision.--Notwithstanding section 514 of the 
Tariff Act of 1930 or any other provision of law to the contrary, upon 
a 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 goods to which the 
amendment made by section 1 applies and that was made--
            (1) after December 31, 1992; and
            (2) before the 15th day after the date of the enactment of 
        this Act;
and with respect to which there would have been no duty or a lower duty 
if the amendment made by section 1 had applied to such entry or 
withdrawal, shall be liquidated or reliquidated as though such entry or 
withdrawal had occurred on such 15th day.

                                 <all>
```
#### Kulbir SINGH, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 09-71468.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 10, 2011.*

Filed Jan. 18, 2011.

Ashwani K. Bhakhri, Law Offices of Ashwani K. Bhakhri, Burlingame, CA, for Petitioner.

Gerald Alexander, Trial, OIL, Elizabeth Young, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Before: BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

*

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

*180MEMORANDUM **

Kulbir Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence findings of fact, including adverse credibility determinations. *See Chebchoub v. INS,*257 F.3d 1038, 1042 (9th Cir.2001). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility determination based on the implausibility of Singh’s testimony that he experienced the events described in his asylum application, given that his application contained the identical sequence and details of events contained in another application prepared by Boota Singh Basi, and that Basi filed before Singh entered the United States. *See Singh v. Gonzales,*439 F.3d 1100, 1110 (9th Cir.2006) (skepticism as to the plausibility of testimony may be a proper basis for an adverse credibility determination if the IJ’s logical inferences are supported by substantial evidence); *see also Fernandes v. Holder,*619 F.3d 1069, 1075 (9th Cir.2010) (adverse credibility determination based, in part, on Basi’s testimony that every application he had ever filed was false supported by substantial evidence). Accordingly, in the absence of credible testimony, Singh’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. *See Farah v. Ashcroft,*348 F.3d 1153, 1156-57 (9th Cir.2003).

Because Singh’s CAT claim is based on the same testimony found to be not credible, and Singh does not point to any other evidence that shows it is more likely than not he would be tortured if returned to India, his CAT claim fails. *See id.*at 1156-57.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
< > 

Batch XML Validator 

Download the Export Batch Schema XSD 

* Please select the file to validate: 

Select 

(Only .xm l files can be uploaded.) 

Va lidate 

File name 6019 .xml was validated without any validation errors. 

File name 4841.xml has validation errors. 

Severi~ Error Numbe~ Position I 

)( 

)( 

I Download Results I 

Line: '14'; Position : •2· :~~~~~~ :~ ~~~ ~~ · element is inval id 

The 'Submit' element is invalid - The value Line : '22'; Position : '32' - The string 'X' is not a valid Boolean value. 

PHIS Quick Reference Guide for 

Export Batch XML Validator 

This guide provides step-by-step instructions for using the batch XML testing tool. This tool takes a user created xml file and compares the contents to the PHIS 

Batch XSD. 

Tool Overview 

The XML Validator takes an uploaded XML file 

and compares the layout to the defined XSD 

schema required for PHIS Batch processing. 

The results of the test are displayed on the 

page with an indication that the file passed the 

schema check or that it contained validation 

errors. If errors are detected, the results are 

displayed with an error number, position, and 

error message. 

eAuthentication Accounts 

The XML Validator requires an eAuth account 

to access the tool. 

Export Batch Documentation 

The PHIS Export Component page contains 

details on Exports. 

• Export Batch User Guide 

• XML Validator including the Export 

Batch Schema XSD 

• Sample XML test file 

9060 Batch Sample.xml 

About the Results 

The validator is checking the XML file against 

the provided XSD schema. Loads to PHIS 

have additional checks requiring PHIS data 

that this tool won’t identify. For example, the 

tool checks that the PHIS-ID field is populated, 

but not that it is a valid user. When a 

replacement application is tested, there is no 

check that the entered certificate is valid and 

approved. 

Using the Tool 

1. Press the Select button to identify the file 

to use for the test. 

2. A file select window opens. Select the file 

to test and select Open. The tool displays 

the name of the file selected and verifies 

that the selected file has an xml extension. 

3. Click the Validate button to run the test. 

4. The test displays one of two results: 

or 

5. The page displays the results. The user 

has the option to save a text file of the 

results using Download Results. 

Review 

The XSD, sample file, and batch user 

guide contain all the necessary 

information for creating a sample export 

batch xml file. 

Create 

Modify the sample file or create a new 

file to load into the XML Validator. 

Test and Review 

Load the test file to see the results. 

Update and Re-test 

Complete the test by reviewing the 

results and make adjustments to the file 

based on the displayed message. 

Getting Help 

For Export Technical Issues/Questions (e.g., 

submitting/deleting applications, batching 

upload, etc.): 

Call: 800-473-9135 or 

Email: PHISTechnicalQA@fsis.usda.gov 

For Export Policy Questions (e.g., clarifying a 

FSIS notice, directive, form, or guidance on 

countries’ export requirements, etc.) 

Visit: https://askfsis.custhelp.com
|   | 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. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                  |   |                          |
|-----------------------|--------|-------------------------------|
|                  |   |                          |   |
| Date: August 12, 2010 | By:    | /s/ James R. Ingebritsen |   |
|                  |   | James R. Ingebritsen          |   |
|                  |   | Chief Executive Officer       |   |
|                  |   |                          |   |
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 
HOE. Charles I:. Theobsld, ?a@~ 2. 

those uxpressly or aplledly oonierred upon them by 

law, - that is, by tfic corM.itutbon and etatutere or 

the state." (Tax. CTur., Vol. il, SOC. 37, p.p. 564- 

565.) 

*The jurisdiotion of Com&mlonere* Court6 ia 

llxnIted.to strictly *county buslnese,* and the legislature has no authmity to enlarge their power8 or 

jurlIadiotion. Any attei-fl to ootier upon the oourt jurlsdlotica or a mtter which la not *county badness* 

i8void+*r*~ crer. Jllr., To& u, pap* film-566). 

Attvbr a nioat earetul and oxlaa~tiYe utudy of 

:thh ~:quaubloll lm hat. beaa unable to find any amlorl~ 

~ty,,:+zipreu ~1: lmplled, nbiah wo uld luttmr3.m She ~eotitbr rraaiirdmera of QalYeatal ootmty, Texas to expend 

momy r0r? ths,payrnmt 0r ur0-g~~~~ we are wiabx0 

fo &Y.ssdwsy authority uhlsih would al.aaaiSy th% a.pub 

..if\pg:.u L -.:. _ -.y I l a o ua btudy no uî* 

Tlwrsfore, +ti a r e r eup eo t@ advised, il.ly that 

At Air thu opinion or thh do-t that th6 cwulttr 

uculauulma8~‘uourt of QdLneton, Teru do.& not haqo 

asithbrlty to employ llfetgardu Sor the .Uamwstar 

b.a@i land pay moh 3Uequards for their -somleeu -at 

al O~guIq fund&
**Exhibit      32.2**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|   | (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 result of operations of the                Company. |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                        |                                                               |                                  |
|---------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------|
|                                        | Dark                Dynamite, Inc. (Registrant)                    |
|                                   |                                                          |                             |
| Date: November                22, 2005 | By:                                                      | /s/                Wang, Xiaojun |
|                                        | Wang,                XiaojunChief                Financial Officer |
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

**PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE**

**SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, John A. Moore, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of American RetirementVillas Properties II, A California Partnership; 

 

2. Based on myknowledge, this quarterly 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 misleadingwith respect to the period covered by this quarterly report; 

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report; 

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have: 

 

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures toensure 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 quarterly report is being prepared; 

 

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report (the “Evaluation Date”); and 

 

c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on ourevaluation as of the Evaluation Date; 

 

5. The registrant’sother certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): 

 

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operationof internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant’s auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

 

b) any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls; and 

 

6. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internalcontrols or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses. 

 

Date: May 17, 2004