alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 537

 540

 568

 575

 565

 576

 560

 520

 518

 523

 523

 514

 520

 497

 492

 490

 533

 562

 565

 564

 551

 565

 572

 648

 669

 643

 628

 648

 678

 644

 581

 492

 508

 508

 521

 524

 533

 496

 451

 454

 442

 435

 421

 438

 435

 455

 471

 488

 536

 544

 514

 518

 522

 521

 558

 561

 556

 559

 538

 543

 518

 500

 512

 525

 529

 544

 547

 555

 523

 478

 499

 478

 472

 471

 484

 470

 470

 479

 511

 552

 553

 545

 535

 547

 548

 592

 607

 595

 588

 591

 606

 567

 552

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

JANUARY 2018 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: February 1, 2018

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

TDS

 332

 340

 343

 352

 354

 359

 339

 311

 324

 311

 308

 307

 315

 306

 306

 312

 332

 357

 358

 353

 347

 354

 355

 382

 391

 384

 379

 381

 391

 366

 357

TOTAL 16,525

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

DELTA MENDOTA CANAL AT CHECK 21
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6942
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ROBERT LEE BONNIWELL, Defendant - Appellant.
No. 99-7402
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ROBERT LEE BONNIWELL, Defendant - Appellant.Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CR-96-40, CA-97-652) Submitted: November 23, 1999 Decided: December 20, 19992 Before MURNAGHAN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. No. 99-6942 dismissed and No. 99-7402 affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Lee Bonniwell, Appellant Pro Se. Nicholas Stephan Altimari, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).3 PER CURIAM: In No. 99-6942, Robert Lee Bonniwell seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A.§ 2255 (West Supp. 1999). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Bonniwell, Nos. CR-96-40; CA-97-652 (E.D. Va. May 12, 1999). In No. 99-7402, Bonniwell appeals the district court’s order denying his request for a certificate of appealability. As we conclude that Bonniwell has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a federal right, we affirm the district court’s ruling. See 28 U.S.C.A. § 2253(c)(2) (West Supp. 1999). We dispense withoral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

No. 99-6942 - DISMISSED No. 99-7402 - AFFIRMED
1

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

Alexandria Division 

In re: )

)

MUSTAPHA ANOUA, SR, ) Case No. 19-11201-BFK

) Chapter 7

Debtor. ) 

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO EXPEDITE HEARING

Upon consideration of the Movants Li/i and Xiaohang Zhou’s Motion to Expedite Hearing 

(Docket No. 14), on their Motion for Relief From Stay (Docket No. 12), it is

ORDERED:

1. The motion to expedite hearing is granted, and a hearing on the Motion for Relief

From Stay (Docket No. 12), will be held on Wednesday, May 8, 2019 at 9:30 a.m..

2. The requirement of filing a written opposition is waived.

3. The Movants shall give notice of this hearing by close of business on April 23, 2019.

4. The Clerk shall mail copies of this Order, or give electronic notice of its entry, to the

parties listed below. 

Date: ________________ _______________________________

Brian F. Kenney 

Alexandria, Virginia United States Bankruptcy Judge 

Copies to: 

Mustapha Anoua, SR Lois Ilaine Upton, Esquire

2007 Oswald Place 7369 McWhorter Place, Suite 412 

Falls Church, VA 22043 Annandale, VA 22003 

Chapter 7 Debtor Counsel for Chapter 7 Debtor 

Apr 22 2019 /s/ Brian F. Kenney

Entered on Docket: April 23, 2019

Case 19-11201-BFK Doc 17 Filed 04/23/19 Entered 04/23/19 07:36:13 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 2
2

Janet M. Meiburger

1493 Chain Bridge Road, Suite 201

McLean, VA 22101-5726

Chapter 7 Trustee

Li Li

Xiaohang Zhou

8401 Tillett Loop

Manassas, VA 20110

Movants

Case 19-11201-BFK Doc 17 Filed 04/23/19 Entered 04/23/19 07:36:13 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 2
#### § 222.73 What information must the State educational agency provide?

The SEA of any State with an LEA applying for assistance under section 8003(b)(2) shall provide the Secretary with relevant information necessary to determine the PPE for all LEAs in the State and whether the LEA meets the applicable tax rate requirement under this subpart.

(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7703(b)(2))
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 6,360

 6,555

 7,994

 8,149

 9,186

 9,009

 7,509

 5,751

 5,035

 4,938

 4,192

 7,048

 7,183

 7,792

 8,494

 8,741

 8,885

 9,240

 10,296

 11,601

 12,789

 12,299

 11,448

 11,087

 10,306

 8,887

 9,243

 9,473

 10,048

 9,962

 9,849

 946

 603

 811

 803

 1,224

 1,071

 1,056

 925

 674

 924

 1,088

 1,839

 1,603

 1,954

 2,804

 3,126

 1,886

 1,417

 1,666

 2,177

 2,823

 2,593

 1,865

 2,272

 2,722

 2,900

 3,085

 3,391

 3,635

 2,822

 2,356

 2,845

 3,368

 3,993

 4,325

 4,605

 4,511

 3,975

 3,240

 2,641

 2,743

 2,745

 3,736

 4,663

 4,738

 5,074

 5,166

 4,657

 4,871

 5,602

 6,435

 7,282

 7,110

 6,470

 6,207

 6,337

 6,165

 5,950

 6,016

 6,127

 5,759

 5,841

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

JULY 2013 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: October 25, 2013

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

COLLINSVILLE BOTTOM ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
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




I, Robert
P. LoCascio, Chief Executive Officer of LivePerson, Inc. (the “Company”),
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
Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30,
2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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:
      November 8, 2010
              By:
              /s/
      ROBERT P. LOCASCIOName:
              Robert
      P. LoCascioTitle:
              Chief
      Executive Officer




This
certification shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or otherwise subject to the liability of that
section, nor shall it be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing
under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except
to the extent the Company specifically incorporates it by
reference.
§ 300.618 Amendment of records at parent's request. ( a ) A parent who believes that information in the education records collected, maintained, or used under this part is inaccurate or misleading or violates the privacy or other rights of the child may request the participating agency that maintains the information to amend the information.
( b ) The agency must decide whether to amend the information in accordance with the request within a reasonable period of time of receipt of the request.
( c ) If the agency decides to refuse to amend the information in accordance with the request, it must inform the parent of the refusal and advise the parent of the right to a hearing under § 300.619.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1412(a)(8); 1417(c))
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 361

 361

 360

 358

 357

 357

 357

 356

 357

 577

 588

 614

 619

 594

 611

 591

 718

 715

 705

 699

 775

 760

 759

 720

 671

 692

 725

 690

 694

 733

 675

 358

 360

 357

 356

 355

 354

 354

 352

 352

 358

 490

 499

 468

 459

 480

 441

 478

 423

 401

 365

 421

 441

 470

 463

 438

 445

 432

 371

 424

 405

 384

 360

 360

 359

 357

 356

 356

 355

 353

 355

 461

 540

 544

 523

 513

 525

 520

 565

 568

 532

 509

 565

 571

 574

 550

 520

 521

 515

 483

 512

 526

 513

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

JANUARY 2018 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE:February 1, 2018

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

TDS

 238

 238

 238

 237

 236

 236

 235

 234

 235

 301

 350

 352

 339

 333

 340

 337

 365

 367

 345

 331

 365

 369

 371

 356

 337

 338

 334

 314

 332

 341

 333

TOTAL 14,861

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

DELTA MENDOTA CANAL AT HEADWORKS
#### § 303.31 Qualified personnel.

*Qualified personnel* means personnel who have met State approved or recognized certification, licensing, registration, or other comparable requirements that apply to the areas in which the individuals are conducting evaluations or assessments or providing early intervention services.

(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1432(4)(F))
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Louis Semansky, Relator, v. Joseph Johnson, as Fire Commissioner of the City of New York, Respondent.

*917Writ dismissed and proceedings affirmed, with costs. Ho opinion. Present—Ingraham, P. J., Laughlin, Scott, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ.
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
M AR IAN OR

R , D.O., Pla i ntiff - Appe lla

nt,
v. NEVADA STATE B OARD OF OSTEOPATHIC M E DIC INE; PAUL KALEKAS, D.O.; C . DEAN M ILNE, D.O.; R ONALD HEDGER , D.O.; PAUL EDWARDS, Esq.; DOES, De fe nda nts I through X, Inc lusive ; R OES, C orporations A through Z, inc lusive ,

De fe nda n ts - Appe lle e s. No. 14-16445 D.C . No. 2:12-c v-02119-GM

N-VC F
M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Distric t of Ne v a da Gloria M
. Nava rro, C hie f Judge , Pre s iding Subm itte d August 9, 2016 ** San Fran c isc o , C a lifornia 

# FIL ED AUG 11 2016 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S
. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without ora l a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a )(2).B e fore : GR

AB ER and M c KEOW

N, C irc u it Judge s, a

nd LYNN, *** C hie f Distric t Judge
. M arian Orr a

ppe a ls the distric t c ourt’ s orde r dism issing he r 42 U.S.C
. § 1983 c la im a l l e ging tha

t the Ne va da

State B oa

rd of Oste opathic M e dic ine and its
m e m b e rs (c olle c t ive ly , “ the B oa rd” ) viola t e d he r Fourte e nth Am e ndm e nt proc e d ura l due proc e ss rights by im posing a $250 fine a s a

c ondition for re ne wing he r m e dic a l lic e nse . W e have jurisdic tion unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1291. W e re vie w de novo the distric t c ourt’ s gra nt of the m otion to dism

iss. C astle v . Eurofre

sh, Inc
. , 731 F.3d 901, 905 (9th C ir. 2013). Orr re c e i v e d notic e of the B oa rd’ s c onc e rns with he r lic e n se re ne wa l
a pplic a tion a

nd, be fore im

posing thefine , the B oa

rd a fforde d Orr an

opportunity

to
a tte nd a he aring with c o unse l a

nd to pre se nt he r argum e nts a nd e vide nc e . T his proc e d ure m e t due proc e ss re quire m e nts unde r the Fourte e nth Am e ndm e nt. C le v e land Bd. of Educ . v . Loude rmill , 470 U.S. 532, 542 (1985). Orr’ s c la im

tha t the B oa rd fa ile d to c om

ply with Ne va da ’ s sta

t utory lic e nse re ne wa l re quire m e nts in im posing thefine doe s not ra ise a fe de ra l c onstitutiona

l
c la im and is not c o gniz a

ble unde r § 1983. Se e C

ollins v . C

i ty of Hark e r He ights , 503 U.S. 115, 119 (1992) (holding tha t § 1983 “ doe s not providea re m e dy for

*** The Honora

ble B arbara M . G. Ly

nn, Unite d State s C h ie f Distric t Judge for the Northe rn Distric t of Te xa s, sitting by de signa tion. 2a

buse s tha t do not viola

te fe de ra l la

w” ); se e also Loude rmill , 470 U.S. a t 541 (noting tha

t the proc e ss due unde r the Fourte e nth Am e ndm e nt “ is not to be found” in sta te sta tutory provisions). AFFIRM E D.

3
116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4806 

AN ACT 

To amend the Controlled Substances Act to authorize the 

debarment of certain registrants, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 4806 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Debarment Enforce3 ment of Bad Actor Registrants Act of 2020’’ or the 

4 ‘‘DEBAR Act of 2020’’. 

5 SEC. 2. DEBARMENT OF CERTAIN REGISTRANTS. 

6 Section 304 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 

7 U.S.C. 824) is amended by adding at the end the fol8 lowing: 

9 ‘‘(h) The Attorney General may issue an order to pro10 hibit, conditionally or unconditionally, and permanently or 

11 for such period as the Attorney General may determine, 

12 any person from being registered under this title to manu13 facture, distribute, or dispense a controlled substance or 

14 a list I chemical, if the Attorney General finds that— 

15 ‘‘(1) such person meets or has met any of the 

16 conditions for suspension or revocation of registra17 tion under subsection (a); and 

18 ‘‘(2) such person has a history of prior suspen19 sions or revocations of registration.’’. 

20 SEC. 3. DETERMINATION OF BUDGETARY EFFECTS. 

21 The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of 

22 complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, 

23 shall be determined by reference to the latest statement 

24 titled ‘‘Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation’’ for this 

25 Act, submitted for printing in the Congressional Record 

26 by the Chairman of the House Budget Committee, pro-
3 

•HR 4806 EH

1 vided that such statement has been submitted prior to the 

2 vote on passage. 

Passed the House of Representatives November 17, 

2020. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 
116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4806 

AN ACT 

To amend the Controlled Substances Act to authorother purposes. ize the debarment of certain registrants, and for
§ 370.16 How does the Secretary review an appeal of a redesignation? ( a ) If either party requests a meeting under § 370.14(f) or § 370.15(b), the meeting is to be held within 30 days of the submissions by the Governor under § 370.15, unless both parties agree to waive this requirement. The Secretary promptly notifies the parties of the date and place of the meeting.
( b ) Within 30 days of the informal meeting permitted under paragraph (a) of this section or, if neither party has requested an informal meeting, within 60 days of the submissions required from the Governor under § 370.15, the Secretary issues to the parties a final written decision on whether the redesignation was for good cause.
( c ) The Secretary reviews a Governor's decision based on the record submitted under §§ 370.14 and 370.15 and any other relevant submissions of other interested parties. The Secretary may affirm or, if the Secretary finds that the redesignation is not for good cause, remand for further findings or reverse a Governor's redesignation.
( d ) The Secretary sends copies of the decision to the parties by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, or other means that provide a record of receipt by both parties.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 1820-0520) (Authority: Sections 12(c) and 112(c)(1)(B) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended; 29 U.S.C. 709(c) and 732(c)(1)(B))
No. 15,927.

#### Flanders *v.*Pueblo, a municipal corporation et al., Freeman et al. Interveners.

(194 P. [2d] 910)

Decided June 14, 1948.

Mr. John W. El well, for plaintiff in error.

Mr. Charles M. Rose, for defendants in error.

Mr. Myles P. Tallmadge, for interveners.

Per Curiam.

Judgment affirmed en banc without written opinion, Mr. Justice Alter not participating.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 400

 394

 437

 490

 490

 462

 487

 498

 486

 478

 478

 483

 484

 474

 461

 464

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 381

 386

 390

 440

 453

 433

 427

 487

 465

 452

 463

 478

 471

 460

 453

 454

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 388

 390

 410

 471

 480

 445

 449

 493

 481

 470

 469

 480

 477

 467

 458

 458

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

DECEMBER 2011 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: February 2, 2012

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

TDS

 256

 257

 269

 307

 313

 291

 293

 321

 313

 306

 306

 313

 311

 305

 299

 299

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

TOTAL 7,286

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

DELTA MENDOTA CANAL AT CHECK 20
EXHIBIT 32.1
                                  ------------


                CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER, AND
                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

         In  connection  with  the  quarterly  report  on Form  10-QSB  of Raser
Technologies  Inc. (the  "Registrant") for the quarter ended September 30, 2004,
we, the undersigned  Chief Executive  Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the
Registrant, respectively, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that based on
our knowledge:

         1.   The  quarterly  report fully  complies  with the  requirements  of
              Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         2.   The information contained in the quarterly report fairly presents,
              in all material respects,  the financial  condition and results of
              operations of the Registrant.


November 5, 2004                                   /s/  Kraig Higginson
----------------                                   --------------------
    (Date)                                         Kraig Higginson,
                                                   Chief Financial Officer
                                                   (principal financial officer)

November 5, 2004                                   /s/  William Dwyer
----------------                                   ------------------
    (Date)                                         William Dwyer,
                                                   Chief Financial Officer
                                                   (principal financial officer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                       3,930,450
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,179,532
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (20,000)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,532,771
<PP&E>                                       8,303,418
<DEPRECIATION>                                (520,748)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              24,655,213
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        8,933,250
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      3,578
<COMMON>                                        15,315
<OTHER-SE>                                  11,429,086
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                24,655,213
<SALES>                                      5,706,799
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,706,799
<CGS>                                        5,571,932
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                9,704,447
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             527,861
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (4,512,624)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (4,512,624)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (4,512,624)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.35)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.35)


</TABLE>
#### Annie Schweitzer, as Administratrix, etc., of William F. Schweitzer, Deceased, Respondent, v. The Union Switch and Signal Company, Appellant.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present—

Ingraham, P. J., Laughlin, Scott and Dowling, JJ.
§ 361.700 What are the one-stop infrastructure costs? ( a ) Infrastructure costs of one-stop centers are nonpersonnel costs that are necessary for the general operation of the one-stop center, including: ( 1 ) Rental of the facilities;
( 2 ) Utilities and maintenance;
( 3 ) Equipment (including assessment-related products and assistive technology for individuals with disabilities); and
( 4 ) Technology to facilitate access to the one-stop center, including technology used for the center's planning and outreach activities.
( b ) Local WDBs may consider common identifier costs as costs of one-stop infrastructure.
( c ) Each entity that carries out a program or activities in a local one-stop center, described in §§ 361.400 through 361.410, must use a portion of the funds available for the program and activities to maintain the one-stop delivery system, including payment of the infrastructure costs of one-stop centers. These payments must be in accordance with this subpart; Federal cost principles, which require that all costs must be allowable, reasonable, necessary, and allocable to the program; and all other applicable legal requirements.