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

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________

NO. 09-16-00252-CV

____________________

MICHAEL DAVID BELLOW JR., Appellant

V.

COURTNEY BELLOW, Appellee

_______________________________________________________ ______________

On Appeal from the 356th District Court

Hardin County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 54996 

________________________________________________________ _____________

ORDER

Appellant, Michael David Bellow Jr., filed a notice of bankruptcy. See Tex. 

R. App. P. 8.1. This proceeding is abated for administrative purposes only, and will 

be treated as a closed case unless timely reinstated by proper motion. See Tex. R. 

App. P. 8.2.

ORDER ENTERED October 13, 2016.

 PER CURIAM

 

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access to publicationsin the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging and locatorservices, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications (CGP). Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event that publicationsare no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Light-duty automotivetechnology, carbon dioxide emissions, and fuel economy trends, 1975 through**
 
2009 | 2010| 2011 | 2012
 
 
2013  
Full Report
Report Tables
List of Appendices
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
Appendix F
Appendix G
Appendix H
Appendix I
Appendix J
Appendix K
2014  
Full Report
Report Tables
List of Appendices
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
Appendix F
Appendix G
Appendix H
Appendix I
Appendix J
Appendix K
2015  
Full Report
Summary
Report Tables
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
Appendix F
Appendix G
Appendix H
Appendix I
Appendix J
Appendix K
2016  
Full Report
Summary
Report Tables
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
Appendix F
Appendix G
Appendix H
Appendix I
Appendix J
2017  
Full Report
Summary
Report Tables
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
Appendix F
Appendix G
Appendix H
Appendix I
Appendix J
Appendix K
 
 
SuDoc Number:EP 6.68:
Item Number:0484-E-05 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000870281
 
April 5, 2018
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 ELEV

 223.34

 223.39

 223.02

 222.88

 222.56

 222.42

 221.81

 221.00

 221.21

 222.89

 222.75

 222.76

 222.83

 223.42

 222.13

 223.10

 223.03

 222.38

 223.65

 223.84

 222.97

 222.00

 223.12

 223.81

 222.54

 223.42

 222.93

 223.17

 221.51

 221.69

 221.90

 51,955

 52,089

 51,100

 50,726

 49,873

 49,501

 47,887

 45,760

 46,311

 50,753

 50,379

 50,406

 50,593

 52,169

 48,730

 51,313

 51,126

 49,394

 52,786

 53,296

 50,966

 48,385

 51,367

 53,216

 49,820

 52,169

 50,859

 51,500

 47,099

 47,572

 48,124

STORAGE

-2,041

+134

-989

-374

-853

-372

-1,614

-2,127

+551

+4,442

-374

+27

+187

+1,576

-3,439

+2,583

-187

-1,732

+3,392

+510

-2,330

-2,581

+2,982

+1,849

-3,396

+2,349

-1,310

+641

-4,401

+473

+552

CHANGE

703

688

665

652

586

601

819

734

659

757

800

695

590

602

643

777

691

594

569

630

710

803

882

905

866

872

849

760

710

743

705

PUMPING

 312

 0

 0

 0

 698

 535

 1,136

 1,292

 1,671

 1,039

 892

 801

 566

 836

 1,363

 378

 425

 711

 489

 809

 1,931

 1,706

 318

 0

 334

 217

 224

 397

 857

 506

 304

PUMPING

 2,805

 1,760

 2,762

 1,769

 1,750

 1,392

 1,384

 1,375

 453

 456

 1,390

 1,386

 1,153

 577

 4,099

 1,133

 1,813

 905

 900

 1,803

 2,007

 2,676

 883

 1,354

 3,984

 1,312

 3,067

 1,617

 3,879

 1,270

 1,164

PUMPING

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

GEN.

*

+97

+44

+155

+15

+84

-14

+43

-85

-80

+31

+30

-36

-87

-54

+17

-1

-51

-58

+133

+59

+91

+46

-119

+85

+53

+42

-64

+84

+127

-82

+48

OR

UNITED STATES 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT

CONSOLIDATED STATE-FEDERAL O'NEILL FOREBAY February 11, 2014

DAILY OPERATIONS

DECEMBER 2013 RUN DATE:

IN LAKE GEN.

ACRE-FEET O'NEILL

RELEASE - C.F.S. 

TOTALS -5,872 22,260 0 54,278 20,747 +553

ACRE-FEET -5,872 44,153 0 107,660 41,152

SUMMARY

 161

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

O'NEILL GEN. 0

SAN LUIS PUMP 107,660 161

 53,996

DOS AMIGOS PUMP 41,152

DELIVERIES 

S. LUIS O'NEILL

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 650

 1,823

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 2,473

 4,905

CALIF. DOS AMIGOS

AQUEDUCT

1,289

1,096

1,443

914

1,348

1,152

844

945

1,173

1,123

1,263

1,543

1,310

1,660

3,068

2,037

1,504

207

2,397

2,180

1,962

2,232

1,942

1,296

1,686

1,800

1,846

1,493

1,680

1,354

993

 46,780

 92,788

S. LUIS

DELIV.

GAINS(+)

LOSS(-)

C.F.S.

INFLOW - C.F.S.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE RESOURCES AGENCY

DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES

STATE WATER PROJECT

TOTAL 148,973

 1,097

* DAILY DEL. FIGURES UNAVAILABLE. TOT. DEL. IS INCLUDED IN COMPUTING MONTHLY TOTALS 

Table 18
##### 



Exhibit 21
 LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF
DIRECTED ELECTRONICS, INC.
 Name Of Subsidiary
    
    State/County of IncorporationDEI Sales, Inc.
    
    FloridaDEI Headquarters, Inc.
    
    FloridaDEI International, Inc.
    
    FloridaPolk Holding Corp.
    
    MarylandPolk Audio, Inc. (1)
    
    MarylandBritannia Investment Corporation (2)
    
    DelawareDirected Electronics Hong Kong Limited (3)
    
    Hong KongDEI China Holding, Limited (3)
    
    Hong KongDirected Electronics China Ltd. (4)
    
    Peoples Republic of ChinaDirected Electronics Canada, Inc. (3)
    
    Canada4366859 Canada, Inc. (3)
    
    CanadaTrilogix Electronic Systems, Inc. (3)
    
    Canada
 
 (1)
    
    Wholly owned subsidiary of Polk Holding Corp.(2)
    
    Wholly owned subsidiary of Polk Audio, Inc.(3)
    
    Wholly owned subsidiary of DEI International, Inc.(4)
    
    Wholly owned subsidiary of DEI China Holding, Limited
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

 7,072

 5,451

 5,396

 4,718

 4,183

 4,378

 4,344

 5,039

 5,043

 5,342

 5,355

 5,763

 6,536

 6,932

 6,360

 6,499

 6,444

 6,367

 6,231

 6,257

 7,078

 7,491

 8,217

 8,586

 8,351

 9,075

 10,101

 10,330

 9,594

 8,890

 8,597

 944

 1,146

 1,128

 1,487

 1,125

 1,140

 1,231

 1,104

 1,165

 1,020

 1,028

 1,047

 1,263

 1,275

 1,250

 1,482

 1,456

 1,952

 1,916

 1,812

 1,754

 2,222

 2,472

 2,086

 1,985

 2,044

 2,269

 2,849

 2,985

 2,923

 2,694

 2,822

 2,853

 3,000

 2,831

 2,257

 2,208

 2,104

 2,343

 2,396

 2,379

 2,395

 2,602

 3,102

 3,368

 3,323

 3,537

 3,779

 4,029

 3,846

 3,528

 3,525

 4,321

 4,784

 4,291

 4,456

 5,043

 5,525

 5,910

 5,970

 5,403

 5,140

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

AUGUST 2000 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: September 5, 2000

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

PITTSBURG TOP ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. AD11-3-009]

                    In its                     *Order On Rehearing Consolidating Administrative Annual Charges Bill**Appeals And Modifying Annual Charges Billing Procedures,*                     109 FERC ¶ 61,040 (2004) (October 8 Order) the Commission set forth an annual process for Other Federal Agencies (OFAs) to submit their costs related to Administering Part I of the Federal Power Act. Pursuant to the established process, the Director of the Financial Services Division, Office of the Executive Director, on October 1, 2010, issued a letter requesting the OFAs to submit their costs by January 3, 2011 using the OFA Cost Submission Form.                

                    Upon receipt of the agency submissions, the Commission posted the information in eLibrary, and issued, on March 9, 2011, a notice announcing the date for a technical conference to review the submitted costs. On March 24, 2011, the Commission held the technical conference. Technical conference transcripts, submitted cost forms, and detailed supporting documents are all available for review under Docket No. AD11-3. These documents are accessible on-line at                     *http://www.ferc.gov,*                     using the “eLibrary” link and are available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC.                

Interested parties may file specific questions and comments on the FY 2010 OFA cost submissions with the Commission under Docket No. AD11-3-009, no later than April 26, 2011. Once filed, the Commission will forward the questions and comments to the OFAs for response.

                    Anyone with questions pertaining to the technical conference or this notice should contact W. Doug Foster at (202) 502-6118 (via e-mail at                     *doug.foster@ferc.gov*), or Fannie Kingsberry at (202) 502-6108 (via e-mail at                     *fannie.kingsberry@ferc.gov*).                

Dated: April 12, 2011.

Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2011-9372 Filed 4-18-11; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
§ 363.4 Exemptions. ( a ) The portion of any payment due to a Board employee which is subject to legal process to enforce any order for the support of any person shall not exceed 65 percent. Where the individual is supporting a spouse or dependent child, other than a spouse or child with respect to whose support that legal process is issued, the portion subject to legal process is reduced by 10 percent. Where the alimony or support arrearage is less than 12 weeks old, the portion subject to legal process is reduced by 5 percent. If a lower limitation is provided by applicable state or local law, then that lower limitation shall be applied.
( b ) In the absence of some evidence to the contrary, it will be assumed that the defendant is not supporting a spouse or dependent child other than a spouse or child with respect to whose support the legal process is issued.
### §47. Acting Secretary

The chancellor of the Smithsonian Institution may, by an instrument in writing filed in the office of the Secretary thereof, designate and appoint a suitable person to act as Secretary of the Institution when there shall be a vacancy in said office, and whenever the Secretary shall be unable from illness, absence, or other cause to perform the duties of his office; and in such case the person so appointed may perform all the duties imposed on the Secretary by law until the vacancy shall be filled or such inability shall cease. The said chancellor may change such designation and appointment from time to time as the interests of the Institution may in his judgment require.

(May 13, 1884, ch. 44, 23 Stat. 21.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

Similar prior provisions were contained in act Jan. 24, 1879, ch. 21, 20 Stat. 264.
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

DAY HIGH

 15,353

 18,509

 17,595

 15,315

 16,429

 17,420

 16,318

 17,693

 17,162

 16,358

 18,615

 18,025

 18,788

 19,841

 20,257

 20,110

 19,350

 19,295

 20,196

 18,856

 19,637

 20,614

 21,665

 20,599

 20,388

 20,605

 20,189

 20,125

 20,929

 20,404

 8,161

 7,942

 10,103

 9,492

 7,360

 6,921

 6,604

 8,364

 6,006

 8,047

 8,978

 9,932

 8,218

 9,408

 13,975

 13,124

 12,231

 11,757

 11,402

 10,338

 10,685

 13,023

 12,133

 11,620

 11,441

 12,026

 12,401

 12,292

 12,523

 12,351

 11,580

 13,062

 13,635

 12,423

 11,983

 11,544

 12,027

 13,083

 12,127

 12,126

 13,797

 14,872

 13,478

 15,731

 16,935

 16,193

 15,117

 14,951

 15,129

 14,931

 15,602

 17,031

 15,992

 15,196

 15,285

 15,845

 15,853

 15,996

 16,204

 15,756

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

SEPTEMBER 2015 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: October 5, 2015

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

PITTSBURG TOP ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE FLIGHT
INTERNATIONAL GROUP, INC.'S UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED OCTOBER 31, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1996
<CASH>                                         319,641
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,146,465
<ALLOWANCES>                                    47,572
<INVENTORY>                                  2,010,108
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,509,906
<PP&E>                                       5,525,093
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,060,816
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              11,011,149
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,113,339
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         9,990
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,714,673
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                11,011,149
<SALES>                                      4,321,631
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,321,631
<CGS>                                        3,390,007
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,031,678
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              98,838
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                191,115
<INCOME-TAX>                                       267
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            190,848
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   190,848
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Donald H. ANDERSON, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 05-30062.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 9, 2006.*

Decided Feb. 8, 2006.

Joseph E. Thaggard, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Great Falls, MT, for Plaintiff — Appellee.

Evangelo Arvanetes, Federal Defenders of Montana, Great Falls, MT, for Defendant — Appellant.

Before KLEINFELD and GRABER, Circuit Judges, and RAFEEDIE,** District Judge.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

**

 The Honorable Edward Rafeedie, Senior United States District Judge for the Central District of California, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ***

Defendant Donald H. Anderson appeals the sentence imposed following his conviction, upon a guilty plea, of conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 and 846. We vacate and remand.

Defendant objected to the accuracy of certain paragraphs in the presentence report. The district court did not make express findings, under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(i)(3)(B), to resolve the disputed facts. The district court’s general findings that it “accept[ed]” the findings contained in the presentence report and that a specified quantity of pure pseudoephedrine was involved in the conspiracy do not suffice to respond to the objections with particularity or to explain why the district court found that the “orange sludge” was attributable to Defendant. Accordingly, we must vacate the sentence and remand the matter. *See United States v. Carter,*219 F.3d 863 (9th Cir.2000) (requiring explicit factual findings to resolve each disputed factual statement in a presentence report, and vacating and remanding where such resolution was absent); *United States v. Standard,*207 F.3d 1136 (9th Cir.2000) (rejecting sufficiency of catch-all provision in findings of fact, and vacating and remanding sentence).

Because of our disposition of the appeal, we need not and do not reach Defendant’s argument concerning the reasonableness of the sentence ultimately imposed. *See United States v. Booker,*543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005) (holding that the Sentencing Guidelines are advisory only, and requiring review for reasonableness of sentence).

VACATED AND REMANDED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
§ 9.44 Solano County Green Valley. ( a ) *Name.* The name of the viticultural area described in this section is “Green Valley” qualified by the words “Solano County” in direct conjunction with the name “Green Valley.” On a label the words “Solano County” may be reduced in type size to the minimum allowed in 27 CFR 4.38(b).
( b ) *Approved maps.* The appropriate maps for determining the boundaries of the Green Valley viticultural area are two U.S.G.S. maps. They are titled: ( 1 ) “Mt. George Quadrangle, California”, 7.5 minute series (1968); and
( 2 ) “Cordelia Quadrangle, California”, 7.5 minute series (1968).
( c ) *Boundaries.* The Green Valley viticultural area is located in Solano County, California. The beginning point is the intersection of the township line identified as T6N/T5N with the westernmost point of the Solano County/Napa County line on the north border of Section 4, located on U.S.G.S. map “Mt. George Quadrangle.” ( 1 ) From the beginning point, the boundary runs in a southerly direction along the Napa/Solano County border to State Road 12;
( 2 ) Thence east along State Road 12 to where it intersects with Interstate 80;
( 3 ) Thence southwest on Interstate 80 to where it intersects with the Southern Pacific Railroad track;
( 4 ) Thence in an easterly direction along the Southern Pacific Railroad track to where it intersects with range line “R3W/R2W”;
( 5 ) Thence due north on range line “R3W/R2W” to where it intersects with the Solano County/Napa County line;
( 6 ) Thence due west along the Solano County/Napa County line to the point of beginning.
[T.D. ATF-122, 47 FR 37922, Dec. 29, 1982]
#### § 401.175 Government Accountability Office.

We disclose information to the Government Accountability Office when that agency needs the information to carry out its duties.

[72 FR 20941, Apr. 27, 2007]
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY OF 2002

In connection with the annual Report
of Americana Gold and Diamond Holdings, Inc., on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December
31, 2001, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated
below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbannes-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 operation of the
          Company.
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|April 21, 2004 | /s/ David Bending 
David Bending
President
|-------------- | ------------------------------------------
§ 219.42 When evidence of child's dependency is required. Evidence of a child's dependency on the employee is required when— ( a ) The employee is receiving an annuity that can be increased under the social security overall minimum (see part 229 of this chapter) by including a child, grandchild or a spouse who has a child in his or her care;
( b ) A wife under age 65 applies for a full spouse annuity because she has a child or a grandchild of the employee in her care; or
( c ) A child or someone in behalf of a child applies for a child's annuity based on the deceased employee's record.
#### § 229.10 What the social security overall minimum guarantee is.

The social security overall minimum guarantee is the amount of total family benefits which would be paid under the Social Security Act if the employee's railroad service had been covered by that Act. A 100 percent overall minimum benefit may be paid, as described in § 229.11. A 100 percent overall minimum based on age (age O/M) may be payable when the employee is 62 years old. The age O/M is reduced for age for months in which the O/M is payable before the employee attains retirement age. An overall minimum may also be payable before age 62 based on an employee's disability (DIB O/M). The DIB O/M is not reduced for age.
#### § 404.1044 Vacation pay.

We consider your salary while on vacation, or a *vacation allowance* paid by your employer, to be wages.
Kedist Hirpassa, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

U.S. Postal Service, 

Defendant. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Civil Action No. 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

FILED 

NOV 1 8 2009 

Clerk, u.s. District and 

Bankruptcy Courts 

09 2179 

This matter is before the Court on its initial review of plaintiff s pro se complaint, which 

is accompanied by an application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court will grant the 

application and will dismiss the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, as required by Rule 

12(h)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

Plaintiff sues the United States Postal Service for failing to deliver her bank statements to 

her "postal box." CompI. The Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over a "claim arising out 

ofloss, miscarriage, or negligent transmission of letters or postal matter." 28 U.S.C. § 2680(b). 

The complaint therefore is dismissed. A separate Order accompanies this Memorandum 

Opinion. 

~~ United States District Judge 

Date: October;l}. , 2009