alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          40,260
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             544
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    376,341
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        999,442
<ALLOWANCE>                                     11,583
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,595,977
<DEPOSITS>                                   1,025,153
<SHORT-TERM>                                   219,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             15,365
<LONG-TERM>                                    233,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           101
<OTHER-SE>                                     103,358
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               1,595,977
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 20,424
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                6,125
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   405
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                26,954
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               9,172
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              16,190
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           10,764
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      550
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 12,447
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,620
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       4,620
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,072
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.31
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.03
<LOANS-NON>                                      2,455
<LOANS-PAST>                                    25,660
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                11,346
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      678
<RECOVERIES>                                       365
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               11,583
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            11,583
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
131 STAT. 1256 PUBLIC LAW 115–78—NOV. 2, 2017 

Public Law 115–78 

115th Congress 

An Act 

To provide for consideration of the extension under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of nonapplication of No-Load Mode energy efficiency standards to certain 

security or life safety alarms or surveillance systems, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Power And Security Systems 

(PASS) Act’’. 

SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF NONAPPLICATION OF NO-LOAD MODE ENERGY 

EFFICIENCY STANDARD TO CERTAIN SECURITY OR LIFE 

SAFETY ALARM OR SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMS. 

(a) Section 325(u)(3)(D)(ii) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6295(u)(3)(D)(ii)) is amended— 

(1) by striking ‘‘2015’’ each place it appears and inserting 

‘‘2021’’; and 

(2) by striking ‘‘2017’’ and inserting ‘‘2023’’. 

(b) Section 325(u)(3)(E) of the Energy Policy and Conservation 

Act (42 U.S.C. 6295(u)(3)(E)) is amended— 

(1) in clause (ii), by striking ‘‘July 1, 2017,’’ and inserting 

‘‘the effective date of the amendment under subparagraph 

(D)(ii)’’; and 

(2) by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(iv) TREATMENT IN RULE.—In the rule under 

subparagraph (D)(ii) and subsequent amendments the 

Secretary may treat some or all external power supplies designed to be connected to a security or life 

safety alarm or surveillance system as a separate 

Power And 

Security Systems 

(PASS) Act. 

42 USC 6201 

note. 

Nov. 2, 2017 

[S. 190] 


dkrause on DSKBC28HB2PROD with PUBLAWS
PUBLIC LAW 115–78—NOV. 2, 2017 131 STAT. 1257 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—S. 190 (H.R. 511): 

SENATE REPORTS: No. 115–76 (Comm. on Energy and Natural Resources). 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 163 (2017): 

Aug. 1, considered and passed Senate. 

Oct. 11, considered and passed House. 

Æ 

product class or may extend the nonapplication under 

clause (ii).’’. 

Approved November 2, 2017. 


dkrause on DSKBC28HB2PROD with PUBLAWS
EXHIBIT 32.1

Statement of Chief Executive Officer 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 on Form 10-Q of Knight Capital
Group, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Thomas M. Joyce, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted 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) 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/    THOMAS M. JOYCEName:

Thomas M. JoyceTitle:

Chief Executive Officer


Date: November 9, 2007

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not, except to the extent required by
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
§ 5.2 Documents required to be filed for public inspection and published. The following documents are required to be filed for public inspection with the Office of the Federal Register and published in the Federal Register: ( a ) Presidential proclamations and Executive orders in the numbered series, and each other document that the President submits for publication or orders to be published.
( b ) Each document or class of documents required to be published by act of Congress.
( c ) Each document having general applicability and legal effect.
[37 FR 23604, Nov. 4, 1972, as amended at 54 FR 9676, Mar. 7, 1989]
#### Barbara Anne NISTENDIRK, Plaintiff, v. Andrew Lee McGEE, Sr., Defendant.

No. 852.

United States District Court W. D. Missouri, Central Division.

Nov. 8, 1963.

See, also, D.C., 225 F.Supp. 881, D.C., 225 F.Supp. 884.

Scott O. Wright, Columbia, Mo., for plaintiff.

F. Russell Millin, U. S. Dist. Atty., Kansas City, Mo., for defendant.

GIBSON, Chief Judge.

This is an action brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act for injuries sustained by plaintiff when she was struck by defendant, McGee’s, vehicle which was being operated within the scope of his employment as a rural mail carrier for the United States. The United States has now made a motion to implead the MFA Insurance Company as a person who is or may be liable to the United States, pursuant to Rule 14, Fed. R.Civ.P. Suggestions have been filed in support of said motion but no suggestions have been received in opposition and the time within which to file suggestions in opposition has under our rules expired.

*884The Court is of the opinion that this case is governed by the case of Irvin v. United States, 148 F.Supp. 25 (D.C.S.D.1957), which held that under a similar policy of insurance the United States was an insured under the policy under the provision which states that an insured includes “ * * * any person or organization legally responsible for the use * * * ” of the automobile. The Court therefore concludes that the joinder of MFA is proper.

It is so ordered.
#### Joseph C. DUNFORD, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 6826.

United States Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit.

Argued Oct 11, 1954.

Decided Oct. 14, 1954.

Martin Abraham and A. A. Bangel, Portsmouth, Va., for appellant.

William F. Davis, Asst. U. S. Atty., Norfolk, Va. (L. S. Parsons, Jr., U. S. Atty., Norfolk, Va., on the brief), for appellee.

Before PARKER, Chief Judge, SOPER, Circuit Judge, and BOREMAN, District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a conviction and sentence under an indictment charging violation of the Harrison Anti-Narcotic Act, 26 U.S.C. § 2554. Appellant is! a physician. He was convicted on thé testimony of three government agents who, pretending to be narcotic addicts,, obtained from him prescriptions enabling them to purchase narcotic drugs. They testified that these prescriptions were issued without examination upon their paying $3 each for the prescriptions. The indictment contained thirty-four counts each of which charged an offense with respect to a prescription given to one of the government agents. The jury at first returned a verdict of guilty on ten of the counts and reported that it was unable to agree on the other counts. On further consideration of these under direction of the judge, they found appellant guilty on twelve additional counts and the remaining counts were nol prossed. Appellant was fined $100 and given a sentence of five years imprisonment on each of the counts on which he was convicted, the sentences to run concurrently.

At the bar of the court, question was raised as to the constitutionality of the Act; but this question is too well settled to admit of argument. United States v. Jin Fuey Moy, 241 U.S. 394, 36. S.Ct. 658, 60 L.Ed. 1061; Id.,254 U.S. 189, 41 S.Ct. 98, 65 L.Ed. 214; United States v. Doremus, 249 U.S. 86, 39 S.Ct. 214, 63 L.Ed. 493; Webb v. United States, 249 U.S. 96, 39 S.Ct. 217, 63 L.Ed. 497; United States v. Balint, 258 U.S. 250, 42 S.Ct. 301, 66 L.Ed. 604; United States v. Behrman, 258 U.S. 280, 42 S.Ct. 303, 66 L.Ed. 619; Linder v. United States, 268 U.S. 5, 45 S.Ct. 446, 69 L.Ed. 819. The only real question in the case was whether the appellant, in giving prescriptions to the government agents, was acting in good faith in the proper practice of his profession or was intending to aid drug addicts to obtain narcotic drugs unlawfully. This question was fairly submitted to the jury in the court’s charge; and the jury’s *185verdict was amply sustained by the evidence. Question has been raised with respect to the joinder of offenses in the indictment; but there can be no question but that the joinder was proper. Rules of Criminal Procedure, rule 8(a), 18 U.S.C.A.; Simpkins v. United States, 4 Cir., 78 F.2d 594; Smith v. United States, 86 U.S.App.D.C. 195, 180 F.2d 775.

Affirmed.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

February 10 , 2015 

# Order

Clerk February 10 , 2015

149502 (4 9 )

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MI CHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

SC: 149502

v COA: 314375

Leelanau CC: 12

- 001777

- FH

JOSEPH WILLIAM MILLER,

Defendant

- Appellee.

_____________________________________/

On order of the C hief Justice , the motion of defendant

- appellee to extend the time

for filing his brief on appeal is GRANTED

. The brief submitted on February 4 , 2015, is

accepted for filing

.
### **CHAPTER 133—FACILITIES FOR RESERVE COMPONENTS**

Sec.
2231.
Reference to chapter 1803.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior chapter 133 was transferred to end of part V of subtitle E of this title and renumbered chapter 1803.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-8054

In Re: LACY DAVIS, III,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-01-633-2)

Submitted: April 15, 2002 Decided: May 14, 2002

Before WILKINS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lacy Davis, III, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Lacy Davis filed a petition for a writ of mandamus asking this

court to overturn the district court’s dismissal of his civil tort

complaint, and remand for further consideration.

Mandamus is a drastic remedy to be used only in extraordinary

circumstances. Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394,

402 (1976 ). Mandamus relief is only available when there are no

other means by which the relief sought could be granted, In re

Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987), and may not be used as a

substitute for appeal. In re Catawba Indian Tribe, 973 F.2d 1133,

1135 (4th Cir. 1992). The party seeking prohibition or mandamus

relief carries the heavy burden of showing that he has no other

adequate means to attain the relief he desires and that his

entitlement to such relief is clear and indisputable. Allied Chem.

Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc., 449 U.S. 33, 35 (1980).

Lacy has not made such a showing. He had an ample opportunity

to pursue a direct appeal from the district court’s dismissal

order, but declined to do so. He may not now employ a mandamus

petition to avoid the consequences of his failure to appeal.

Accordingly, we deny Lacy’s petition for mandamus relief. 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.

PETITION DENIED
### **CHAPTER 47A—MILITARY COMMISSIONS**

Subchapter
Sec.
I.
General Provisions
948a.
II.
Composition of Military Commissions
948h.
III.
Pre-Trial Procedure
948q.
IV.
Trial Procedure
949a.
V.
Classified Information Procedures
949p–1.
VI.
Sentences
949s.
VII.
Post-Trial Procedure and Review of Military Commissions
950a. 1

VIII.
Punitive Matters
950p.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

This chapter was originally added by Pub. L. 109–366, §3(a)(1), Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2600, and amended by Pub. L. 110–181, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 3. This chapter is shown here, however, as having been added by Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title XVIII, §1802, Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2574, without reference to those intervening amendments because of the general amendment of this chapter by Pub. L. 111–84.

#### Amendments

**2018**—Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title X, §1081(a)(10), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1983, substituted "VII. Post-Trial Procedure and Review of Military Commissions" for "VII. Post-Trial Procedures and Review of Military Commissions ... 950a." in item relating to subchapter VII.

1  Starting section number editorially supplied.
#### § 1000.197 How will BIA resolve a claim?

All findings and claims timely made in accordance with §§ 1000.194 through 1000.195 will be resolved in accordance with 25 CFR part 2.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 
-  JTF-Micronesia		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

# 7th Fleet Ballistic Missile Team Supports JMSDF in Exercise Keen Edge

By Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Toni BurtonU.S. Navy

                YOKOSUKA, Japan  –              http://www.cpf.navy.mil/news.aspx/030331

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT
### §10147. Ready Reserve: training requirements

(a) Except as specifically provided in regulations to be prescribed by the Secretary of Defense, or by the Secretary of Homeland Security with respect to the Coast Guard when it is not operating as a service in the Navy, each person who is enlisted, inducted, or appointed in an armed force, and who becomes a member of the Ready Reserve under any provision of law except section 513 or 10145(b) of this title, shall be required, while in the Ready Reserve, to—

(1) participate in at least 48 scheduled drills or training periods during each year and serve on active duty for training of not less than 14 days (exclusive of traveltime) during each year; or

(2) serve on active duty for training not more than 30 days during each year.

(b) A member who has served on active duty for one year or longer may not be required to perform a period of active duty for training if the first day of that period falls during the last 120 days of the member's required membership in the Ready Reserve.

(Added Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title XVI, §1661(a)(1), Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2973; amended Pub. L. 107–296, title XVII, §1704(b)(1), Nov. 25, 2002, 116 Stat. 2314.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

Provisions similar to those in this section were contained in section 270(a) of this title, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 103–337, §1661(a)(2)(A).

#### Amendments

2002—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 107–296 substituted "of Homeland Security" for "of Transportation" in introductory provisions.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 2002 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 107–296 effective on the date of transfer of the Coast Guard to the Department of Homeland Security, see section 1704(g) of Pub. L. 107–296, set out as a note under section 101 of this title.

#### Effective Date

Section effective Dec. 1, 1994, except as otherwise provided, see section 1691 of Pub. L. 103–337, set out as a note under section 10001 of this title.

Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title XVI, §1661(a)(5)(A), Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2980, provided that: "Section 10147(a) [10 U.S.C. 10147(a)], as added by paragraph (1), applies only to persons who were inducted, enlisted, or appointed in an armed force after August 9, 1955."
I

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 929

To amend title 13, United States Code, to require that the questionnaire

used in taking the 2000 decennial census be made available in certain

languages besides English.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 2, 1999

Mr. MILLER of Florida (for himself, Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin, Mr. DAVIS of

Virginia, and Mr. SOUDER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Government Reform

A BILL

To amend title 13, United States Code, to require that

the questionnaire used in taking the 2000 decennial census be made available in certain languages besides

English.

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 ‘‘2000 Census Language

5 Barrier Removal Act’’.
2

•HR 929 IH

1 SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT.

2 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter I of chapter 1 of title

3 13, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end

4 the following:

5 ‘‘§ 17. Requirement relating to census questionnaires

6 ‘‘(a) The Secretary shall design and carry out a pro7 gram under which—

8 ‘‘(1) the short form used in taking the 2000 de9 cennial census shall, in addition to being printed in

10 English, be prepared in each of the alternative ver11 sions described in subsection (b);

12 ‘‘(2) upon request, a household shall, instead of

13 receiving the printed English version of that short

14 form, be sent the alternative version (described in

15 subsection (b)) specified in its request; and

16 ‘‘(3) those alternative versions shall otherwise

17 be made available to the public in such manner as

18 will, in the judgment of the Secretary, most effec19 tively enhance response rates in the 2000 decennial

20 census.

21 ‘‘(b) The versions described in this subsection are Ar22 abic, Armenian, Bengali, Cambodian, Chinese, Creole,

23 Czech, Dutch, Farsi, French, German, Greek, Hindi,

24 Hungarian, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Lao, Latvian,

25 Lithuanian, Norwegian, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian,

26 Russian, Samoan, Serbo-Croatian, Spanish, Tagalog,
3

•HR 929 IH

1 Thai, Ukrainian, Vietnamese, Yiddish, and such other lan2 guages as the Secretary considers appropriate, as well as

3 braille (for at least English).

4 ‘‘(c) For purposes of this Act—

5 ‘‘(1) the term ‘decennial census’ means a decen6 nial census of population conducted under section

7 141(a); and

8 ‘‘(2) the term ‘short form’ refers to the short

9 form of the questionnaire used in taking a decennial

10 census.’’.

11 (b) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—

12 (1) Section 5 of title 13, United States Code, is amended

13 by striking ‘‘title.’’ and inserting ‘‘title, subject to section

14 17.’’.

15 (2) The table of sections for subchapter I of chapter

16 1 of title 13, United States Code, is amended by adding

17 after the item relating to section 16 the following:

‘‘17. Requirement relating to census questionnaires.’’.

Æ
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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Avalon Holdings Corporation on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Timothy C. Coxson, Chief Financial Officer of Avalon Holdings Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 Avalon Holdings Corporation.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Timothy C. Coxson  
|Timothy C. Coxson      
|Chief Financial Officer

August 11, 2010