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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                       1,709,097
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  327,957
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                      32,849,353
<DEPRECIATION>                            (15,027,239)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              23,723,357
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                     22,453,940
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                 (4,712,617)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                23,723,357
<SALES>                                      1,607,301
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,625,802
<CGS>                                          822,807
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,189,030
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               185,013
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             543,398
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (291,639)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (291,639)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (291,639)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3907 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3907

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend for one year the 
                   credit for solar energy property.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            November 3, 2015

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend for one year the 
                   credit for solar energy property.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF CREDIT FOR SOLAR ENERGY PROPERTY.

    (a) In General.--Paragraphs (2)(A)(i)(II) and (3)(A)(ii) of section 
48(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 are each amended by striking 
``January 1, 2017'' and inserting ``January 1, 2018''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to periods after December 31, 2016, in taxable years ending after 
such date, under rules similar to the rules of section 48(m) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (as in effect on the day before the date 
of the enactment of Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1990).
                                 <all>
```
#### Michael A. BARNES, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Reggie WEISNER, Respondent—Appellee.

No. 06-6454.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: June 30, 2006.

Decided: July 19, 2006.

Michael A. Barnes, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Wallace-Smith, Assistant Attorney General, North Carolina Department of Justice, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Michael A. Barnes seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appeal-ability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. *Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Barnes has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.

*DISMISSED.*
#### Juan Merlos BELECH, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 04-70326.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 13, 2006.*

Decided Feb. 22, 2006.

Garish Sarin, Esq., Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.

Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration *&*Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Andrew C. Maclachlan, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

*821Before: FERNANDEZ, RYMER, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Juan Merlos Belech, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Where, as here, the BIA affirms without opinion, we review the IJ’s decision. *See Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft,*350 F.3d 845, 849 (9th Cir.2003). We dismiss in part, deny in part, and grant in part the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the IJ’s determination that Belech’s asylum application was untimely filed and that he failed to demonstrate extraordinary circumstances to excuse the untimeliness. *See 8*U.S.C. § 1158(a)(3); *Ramadan v. Gonzales,*427 F.3d 1218, 1222 (9th Cir. 2005).

We review for substantial evidence the IJ’s denial of withholding of removal. *See Lanza v. Ashcroft,*389 F.3d 917, 933 (9th Cir.2004). Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s findings that Belech failed to show that it was more likely than not that he would be persecuted if returned to Guatemala and that any feared persecution was not on account of a protected ground. *See 8*C.F.R. § 208.16(b)(2).

The IJ denied Belech’s application for cancellation of removal both because he failed to show continuous physical presence and because he failed to show the requisite exceptional and extremely unusual hardship. We have jurisdiction to review the presence determination, but not the hardship determination. *See Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft,*327 F.3d 887, 890-91 (9th Cir.2003).

Because the BIA affirmed without opinion, we have no way of knowing on which ground or grounds the BIA affirmed, and in turn whether we have jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision as to cancellation. *See Lanza,*389 F.3d at 932. Accordingly, we vacate the BIA’s decision and remand with instructions to clarify its grounds for affirming the IJ’s denial of Belech’s application for cancellation of removal. *Id.*

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part; GRANTED in part; 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.
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


In  connection  with this  Annual  Report  of Morgan  Creek  Energy  Corp.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-KSB for the year ending  December 31, 2007, as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Marcus M.  Johnson,  President/Chief  Executive  Officer and I, D. Bruce Horton,
Treasurer/Chief  Financial  Officer,of  the Company,  certify to the best of our
knowledge,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 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 result of operations of the Company.


Date: April 9, 2008                       /s/ MARCUS M. JOHNSON
                                          _____________________________________
                                              Marcus M. Johnson
                                              President/Chief Executive Officer


                                          /s/ D. BRUCE HORTON
                                          _____________________________________
                                              D. Bruce Horton
                                              Treasurer/Chief Financial Officer
#### § 401.135 Other laws.

When the FOIA does not apply, we may not disclose any personal information unless both the Privacy Act and section 1106 of the Social Security Act permit the disclosure. Section 1106 of the Social Security Act requires that disclosures which may be made must be set out in statute or regulations; therefore, any disclosure permitted by this part is permitted by section 1106.
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

 1,654

 912

 509

 407

 401

 350

 319

 288

 261

 243

 243

 247

 230

 235

 254

 252

 215

 229

 240

 224

 224

 224

 470

 3,403

 5,332

 6,739

 6,763

 7,892

 5,985

 4,692

 3,749

 375

 400

 319

 296

 252

 244

 234

 231

 222

 206

 213

 202

 201

 195

 206

 205

 207

 211

 216

 224

 224

 224

 290

 319

 371

 430

 603

 609

 699

 672

 614

 708

 558

 394

 350

 318

 295

 273

 260

 239

 229

 223

 214

 212

 213

 220

 220

 212

 219

 225

 224

 224

 224

 327

 628

 1,151

 2,130

 2,241

 2,287

 1,873

 1,613

 1,429

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

JANUARY 2002 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: February 12, 2002

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

PITTSBURG TOP ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
Exhibit 31.3

Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a)

I, Tony Aquila, certify that:



| | 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form 10-K of Solera Holdings, Inc.; and
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such
statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       |  |  |  |  |  |                              
|---------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | -----------------------------
|Date: October 28, 2015 |  |  |  |  |  |                              
|                       |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ Tony Aquila              
|                       |  |  |  |  |  | Tony Aquila                  
|                       |  |  |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer      
|                       |  |  |  |  |  | (principal executive officer)
#### § 1002.181 How is “prompt reemployment” defined?

“Prompt reemployment” means as soon as practicable under the circumstances of each case. Absent unusual circumstances, reemployment must occur within two weeks of the employee's application for reemployment. For example, prompt reinstatement after a weekend National Guard duty generally means the next regularly scheduled working day. On the other hand, prompt reinstatement following several years of active duty may require more time, because the employer may have to reassign or give notice to another employee who occupied the returning employee's position.
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

 420

 382

 714

 890

 703

 1,093

 1,376

 1,688

 2,075

 1,365

 719

 590

 701

 1,273

 1,160

 1,837

 2,442

 4,375

 4,383

 6,176

 6,254

 6,487

 6,080

 5,450

 6,704

 4,371

 3,833

 3,734

 4,630

 5,725

 7,371

 205

 194

 195

 198

 201

 204

 204

 222

 230

 229

 236

 235

 242

 256

 267

 286

 336

 358

 429

 464

 624

 642

 707

 683

 799

 713

 535

 539

 675

 841

 993

 231

 232

 274

 310

 295

 349

 434

 534

 574

 488

 407

 370

 427

 462

 446

 582

 809

 1,076

 1,273

 1,749

 2,102

 2,311

 2,310

 2,341

 2,759

 2,003

 1,817

 1,874

 1,875

 2,103

 2,764

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

MAY 2012 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: June 22, 2012

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

PITTSBURG BOTTOM ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
§ 1010.100 What is the purpose and scope of this part? ( a ) Part 1010 contains the Department regulations implementing priority of service for covered persons. Priority of service for covered persons is authorized by section 2(a)(1) of JVA (38 U.S.C. 4215). These regulations fulfill section 605 of the Veterans Benefits, Health Care, and Information Technology Act of 2006, Pub. L. 109-461 (Dec. 22, 2006), which requires the Department to implement priority of service via regulation.
( b ) As provided in § 1010.210, this part applies to all qualified job training programs.
#### § 404.1569 Listing of Medical-Vocational Guidelines in appendix 2.

The Dictionary of Occupational Titles includes information about jobs (classified by their exertional and skill requirements) that exist in the national economy. Appendix 2 provides rules using this data reflecting major functional and vocational patterns. We apply these rules in cases where a person is not doing substantial gainful activity and is prevented by a severe medically determinable impairment from doing vocationally relevant past work. (*See* § 404.1520(h) for an exception to this rule.) The rules in appendix 2 do not cover all possible variations of factors. Also, as we explain in § 200.00 of appendix 2, we do not apply these rules if one of the findings of fact about the person's vocational factors and residual functional capacity is not the same as the corresponding criterion of a rule. In these instances, we give full consideration to all relevant facts in accordance with the definitions and discussions under vocational considerations. However, if the findings of fact made about all factors are the same as the rule, we use that rule to decide whether a person is disabled.

[45 FR 55584, Aug. 20, 1980, as amended at 77 FR 43494, July 25, 2012]
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

 193

 197

 197

 196

 194

 207

 260

 210

 162

 163

 165

 174

 174

 171

 166

 167

 164

 167

 161

 161

 156

 160

 160

 159

 176

 199

 173

 185

 159

 154

 167

 161

 157

 140

 146

 131

 127

 125

 119

 127

 132

 129

 144

 140

 127

 134

 127

 123

 115

 128

 134

 136

 138

 145

 149

 145

 151

 149

 148

 146

 180

 177

 177

 172

 173

 173

 168

 159

 142

 146

 148

 153

 159

 155

 151

 150

 149

 148

 144

 146

 145

 147

 148

 152

 156

 170

 158

 157

 152

 148

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

APRIL 2006 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: May 2, 2006

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
financial statements for Cornerstone Mortgage Investment Group, Inc. for
the year ended December 31, 1995 and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000790524
<NAME> CORNERSTONE MORTGAGE INVESTMENT GROUP, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          33,298
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                33,298
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  33,298
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          481,286
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            10
<OTHER-SE>                                   (447,988)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    33,298
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                18,305
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,565
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 10,740
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    10,740
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
### §1102. Congressional declaration of national policy

The Congress declares that it is the policy of the United States and the purpose of this chapter to focus the comprehensive resources of the Federal Government and bring them to bear on drug abuse with the objective of significantly reducing the incidence, as well as the social and personal costs, of drug abuse in the United States, and to develop and assure the implementation of a comprehensive, coordinated long-term Federal strategy to combat drug abuse. To reach these goals, the Congress further declares that it is the policy of the United States and the purpose of this chapter to meet the problems of drug abuse through—

(1) comprehensive Federal, State, and local planning for, and effective use of, Federal assistance to States and to community-based programs to meet the urgent needs of special populations, in coordination with all other governmental and nongovernmental sources of assistance;

(2) the development and support of community-based prevention programs;

(3) the development and encouragement of effective occupational prevention and treatment programs within the Government and in cooperation with the private sector; and

(4) increased Federal commitment to research into the behavioral and biomedical etiology of, the treatment of, and the mental and physical health and social and economic consequences of, drug abuse.

(Pub. L. 92–255, title I, §102, Mar. 21, 1972, 86 Stat. 66; Pub. L. 94–237, §2, Mar. 19, 1976, 90 Stat. 241; Pub. L. 96–181, §3, Jan. 2, 1980, 93 Stat. 1309.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This chapter, referred to in text, was in the original "this Act", meaning Pub. L. 92–255, Mar. 21, 1972, 86 Stat. 65, known as the Drug Abuse Prevention, Treatment, and Rehabilitation Act, which comprises this chapter. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1101 of this title and Tables.

#### Amendments

1980—Pub. L. 96–181 inserted additional declarations of policy prescribing methods and programs by which the goals are to be reached.

1976—Pub. L. 94–237 substituted "objective of significantly reducing the incidence, as well as the social and personal costs, of drug abuse in the United States, and to develop and assure the implementation of" for "immediate objective of significantly reducing the incidence of drug abuse in the United States within the shortest possible period of time, and to develop".
§ 302.7 Establishing base year service and compensation. ( a ) *Employer reports.* In determining whether an applicant for benefits is a qualified employee, the Board will rely initially upon reports of base year service and compensation provided by employers in accordance with part 209 of this chapter.
( b ) *No employer report located.* If the Board cannot locate the employer's report of base year service and compensation for an applicant, the applicant will be afforded an opportunity, by completing the form prescribed by the Board, to provide such other statement, information, evidence or documentation to establish his or her status as a qualified employee. An employee's claim for credit for service or compensation that is not shown in the Board's records of service and compensation shall be verified in accordance with §§ 210.7 and 211.14 of this chapter.
( c ) *Employer fails to report.* When an employer has failed or refuses to file a report under part 209 of this chapter, an employee may establish his or her base year service and compensation by submitting: ( 1 ) Statements, under oath or otherwise, signed by an official or duly authorized employee of a Federal or State governmental agency, based upon reports to the agency by the employer; or
( 2 ) Statements, under oath or otherwise, signed by an officer or a duly authorized employee of the employer, or if not so signed, on forms prepared by the employer.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control numbers 3220-0025 and 3220-0070)