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 ELEV

 897.48

 897.13

 896.84

 896.28

 895.90

 895.50

 895.10

 894.57

 894.05

 893.86

 893.37

 892.92

 892.43

 891.90

 891.36

 891.02

 890.78

 890.53

 890.03

 889.45

 888.91

 888.60

 888.18

 887.88

 887.51

 887.06

 886.64

 886.30

 885.91

 885.69

 885.45

 708.3

 706.3

 704.6

 701.4

 699.2

 696.9

 694.6

 691.6

 688.6

 687.5

 684.7

 682.2

 679.4

 676.4

 673.4

 671.5

 670.1

 668.7

 665.9

 662.7

 659.7

 658.0

 655.7

 654.0

 652.0

 649.5

 647.2

 645.3

 643.2

 642.0

 640.7

STORAGE

-2.8

-2.0

-1.7

-3.2

-2.2

-2.3

-2.3

-3.0

-3.0

-1.1

-2.8

-2.6

-2.8

-3.0

-3.0

-1.9

-1.3

-1.4

-2.8

-3.2

-3.0

-1.7

-2.3

-1.7

-2.0

-2.5

-2.3

-1.9

-2.1

-1.2

-1.3

CHANGE

71

306

299

79

25

10

-202

138

388

316

257

316

345

393

381

497

452

533

439

389

205

445

405

345

367

301

264

382

322

423

482

INFLOW

 1,439

 1,282

 1,051

 1,636

 1,051

 1,126

 899

 1,586

 1,826

 788

 1,596

 1,528

 1,659

 1,832

 1,833

 1,382

 1,042

 1,186

 1,770

 1,930

 1,637

 1,237

 1,512

 1,100

 1,321

 1,479

 1,353

 1,253

 1,333

 962

 1,078

POWER

 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

SPILL

 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

OUTLET

 64

 47

 93

 71

 78

 41

 56

 79

 59

 72

 64

 75

 82

 69

 78

 78

 87

 52

 78

 86

 81

 73

 64

 80

 73

 71

 71

 67

 64

 65

 63

C.F.S.

 .34

 .25

 .50

 .38

 .42

 .22

 .30

 .43

 .32

 .39

 .35

 .41

 .45

 .38

 .43

 .43

 .48

 .29

 .43

 .48

 .45

 .41

 .36

 .45

 .41

 .40

 .40

 .38

 .36

 .37

 .36

INCHES

 .00

 .02

 .00

 .00

 .21

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

AUGUST 2022 NEW MELONES LAKE DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: September 7, 2022

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS -70.4 9,373 42,707 0 0 2,181 12.03 .23

ACRE-FEET -70,400 18,591 84,709 0 0 4,326

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES AND EVAPORATION.

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 84,709

SPILL 0

OUTLET

TOTAL

 0

 84,709

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 .23

JULY 1, 2022 .23

 711.1

OCT 1, 2021 TO DATE = 19.62
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

 23,212

 22,332

 20,740

 21,320

 18,188

 16,633

 13,286

 14,440

 15,569

 18,636

 21,716

 21,825

 21,860

 22,124

 15,430

 25,100

 21,091

 15,980

 18,142

 14,607

 12,872

 11,682

 16,887

 21,605

 19,192

 18,297

 24,494

 24,606

 23,584

 21,803

 5,900

 5,825

 5,405

 5,084

 5,042

 4,021

 4,488

 4,899

 5,483

 5,976

 6,879

 5,721

 5,845

 6,378

 4,217

 4,951

 6,030

 4,105

 5,144

 4,731

 5,988

 5,417

 5,680

 5,949

 5,132

 5,418

 7,503

 7,440

 3,747

 3,538

 12,965

 13,127

 12,597

 12,135

 11,444

 10,900

 9,236

 9,288

 9,623

 10,498

 12,107

 12,004

 12,354

 11,837

 10,648

 13,877

 13,069

 10,106

 11,483

 9,711

 9,425

 8,152

 9,026

 10,997

 10,820

 11,470

 14,198

 14,631

 10,197

 9,320

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

JUNE 2007 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: July 9, 2007

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

PORT CHICAGO TOP IN SUISUN BAY
### §613. Plans and reassessments

The Secretary shall require that each establishment subject to inspection under this chapter shall, at a minimum—

(1) prepare and maintain current procedures for the recall of all meat or meat food products produced and shipped by the establishment;

(2) document each reassessment of the process control plans of the establishment; and

(3) upon request, make the procedures and reassessed process control plans available to inspectors appointed by the Secretary for review and copying.

(Mar. 4, 1907, ch. 2907, title I, §13, as added Pub. L. 110–234, title XI, §11017(a), May 22, 2008, 122 Stat. 1370, and Pub. L. 110–246, §4(a), title XI, §11017(a), June 18, 2008, 122 Stat. 1664, 2132.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Pub. L. 110–234 and Pub. L. 110–246 enacted identical sections. Pub. L. 110–234 was repealed by section 4(a) of Pub. L. 110–246.

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 613, acts Mar. 4, 1907, ch. 2907, title I, §13, formerly 11th par., 34 Stat. 1263; renumbered §13 and amended Pub. L. 90–201, §§1, 3(b), 12(a), Dec. 15, 1967, 81 Stat. 584, 588, 592, related to inspectors of animals for export and certificates of condition, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 107–171, title X, §10418(a)(19), May 13, 2002, 116 Stat. 508. Section was formerly classified to section 81 of this title.

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

#### Effective Date

Enactment of this section and repeal of Pub. L. 110–234 by Pub. L. 110–246 effective May 22, 2008, the date of enactment of Pub. L. 110–234, see section 4 of Pub. L. 110–246, set out as a note under section 8701 of Title 7, Agriculture.
### §1172. Repealed. Pub. L. 98–24, §2(c)(2), Apr. 26, 1983, 97 Stat. 182

Section, Pub. L. 92–255, title IV, §405, Mar. 21, 1972, 86 Stat. 77; Pub. L. 95–461, §3(b), Oct. 14, 1978, 92 Stat. 1268; Pub. L. 97–35, title IX, §973(c)(1), Aug. 13, 1981, 95 Stat. 598, required that the Secretary of Health and Human Services make periodic reports to the Congress and to the President on drug abuse in the United States. See section 290aa–4 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare.
### §4514. Definitions

As used in this chapter—

(1) the term "Board" means the Board of Trustees of the James Madison Memorial Fellowship Foundation;

(2) the term "Foundation" means the James Madison Memorial Fellowship Foundation;

(3) the term "institution of higher education" has the same meaning given that term by section 1001 of this title; and

(4) the term "secondary school" has the same meaning given that term by section 7801 of this title.

(Pub. L. 99–500, §101(b) [title VIII, §815], Oct. 18, 1986, 100 Stat. 1783–39, 1783–81, and Pub. L. 99–591, §101(b) [title VIII, §815], Oct. 30, 1986, 100 Stat. 3341–39, 3341–81; Pub. L. 105–244, title I, §102(a)(6)(G), Oct. 7, 1998, 112 Stat. 1618; Pub. L. 107–110, title X, §1076(m), Jan. 8, 2002, 115 Stat. 2092; Pub. L. 114–95, title IX, §9215(vv), Dec. 10, 2015, 129 Stat. 2184.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Pub. L. 99–591 is a corrected version of Pub. L. 99–500.

#### Amendments

2015—Par. (4). Pub. L. 114–95 made technical amendment to reference in original act which appears in text as reference to section 7801 of this title.

2002—Par. (4). Pub. L. 107–110 substituted "7801" for "8801".

1998—Par. (3). Pub. L. 105–244, §102(a)(6)(G)(i), substituted "section 1001" for "section 1141(a)".

Par. (4). Pub. L. 105–244, §102(a)(6)(G)(ii), substituted "section 8801" for "section 1141(d)".

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

#### Effective Date of 2015 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 114–95 effective Dec. 10, 2015, except with respect to certain noncompetitive programs and competitive programs, see section 5 of Pub. L. 114–95, set out as a note under section 6301 of this title.

#### Effective Date of 2002 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 107–110 effective Jan. 8, 2002, except with respect to certain noncompetitive programs and competitive programs, see section 5 of Pub. L. 107–110, set out as an Effective Date note under section 6301 of this title.

#### Effective Date of 1998 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 105–244 effective Oct. 1, 1998, except as otherwise provided in Pub. L. 105–244, see section 3 of Pub. L. 105–244, set out as a note under section 1001 of this title.
Exhibit
32





Multiband
Corporation





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 Quarterly
Report Form 10-Q, Multiband Corporation (the “Company”) for the period ended
June 30, 2009, I, James L. Mandel, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





1.
            This
      Periodic Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d));
      and


2.
            The
      information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      the Company.








Date
      August 13, 2009
                  By:
                  /s/
      James L. Mandel
                    Chief
      Executive Officer








In connection with this Quarterly
Report Form 10-Q,  Multiband Corporation (the “Company”) for the
period ended June 30, 2009, I, Steven M. Bell, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





1.
            This
      Periodic Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d));
      and


2.
            The
      information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      the Company.


Date:
      August 13, 2009
                    By:
                    /s/
      Steven M. Bell
                        Chief
      Financial
Officer
 
 Page
40
### §602. Congressional statement of findings

Meat and meat food products are an important source of the Nation's total supply of food. They are consumed throughout the Nation and the major portion thereof moves in interstate or foreign commerce. It is essential in the public interest that the health and welfare of consumers be protected by assuring that meat and meat food products distributed to them are wholesome, not adulterated, and properly marked, labeled, and packaged. Unwholesome, adulterated, or misbranded meat or meat food products impair the effective regulation of meat and meat food products in interstate or foreign commerce, are injurious to the public welfare, destroy markets for wholesome, not adulterated, and properly labeled and packaged meat and meat food products, and result in sundry losses to livestock producers and processors of meat and meat food products, as well as injury to consumers. The unwholesome, adulterated, mislabeled, or deceptively packaged articles can be sold at lower prices and compete unfairly with the wholesome, not adulterated, and properly labeled and packaged articles, to the detriment of consumers and the public generally. It is hereby found that all articles and animals which are regulated under this chapter are either in interstate or foreign commerce or substantially affect such commerce, and that regulation by the Secretary and cooperation by the States and other jurisdictions as contemplated by this chapter are appropriate to prevent and eliminate burdens upon such commerce, to effectively regulate such commerce, and to protect the health and welfare of consumers.

(Mar. 4, 1907, ch. 2907, title I, §2, as added Pub. L. 90–201, §2, Dec. 15, 1967, 81 Stat. 587.)
Exhibit 99.5




                       GE CAPITAL MORTGAGE SERVICES, INC.
             OFFICERS' ANNUAL COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE - SERIES 1998-5


         The undersigned,  Vice Presidents of GE Capital Mortgage Services, Inc.
(the "Servicer"), pursuant to the Pooling and Servicing Agreement for the Series
1998-5 REMIC Multi-Class  Mortgage  Pass-Through  Certificates (the "Agreement")
entered into by GE Capital Mortgage Services,  Inc., as Seller and Servicer, and
State Street Bank and Trust Company,  as Trustee,  which  Agreement  requires an
annual  statement of  compliance  to be made to the Trustee by an officer of the
Servicer, hereby state that:

         (i)      a  review  of  the  activities  of  the  Servicer  during  the
                  preceding  calendar  year  and of its  performance  under  the
                  Agreement  has  been  made  under  the  undersigned  officers'
                  supervision; and

         (ii)     to the best of the undersigned  officers' knowledge,  based on
                  such review,  the Servicer has  fulfilled  all of its material
                  obligations  under the Agreement  throughout such year, except
                  as set forth on Exhibit A hereto.

Capitalized  terms used  herein but not  defined  herein  shall have the meaning
given to them in the Agreement.


Dated:            March 24, 1999




By:/s/ Gregory A. Gibson      
------------------------------
         Gregory A. Gibson
         Vice President


By:/s/ Tim Neer               
------------------------------
         Tim Neer
         Vice President



<PAGE>



                                    EXHIBIT A





                                      None
Exhibit 12.1
  Superior
    Well Services, Inc. and Subsidiaries
    COMPUTATION OF RATIOS OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES AND EARNINGS
    TO FIXED
    CHARGES AND PREFERENCE SECURITIES DIVIDENDS (in thousands except
    ratios)
  2005


2006


2007


2008


2009EARNINGS:Income (loss) before provision for incomes taxes

$
23,293


$
52,714


$
62,325


$
66,174


$
(126,906
)Less: Pre-tax preference dividends














(108
)


(3,000
)Add: Fixed charges


566



282



282



3,017



16,762Total earnings

$
23,859


$
52,996


$
62,607


$
69,083


$
(113,144
)FIXED CHARGES:Interest expense(1)

$
566


$
282


$
282


$
2,834


$
13,762Dividend requirements(2)














183



3,000Total fixed charges

$
566


$
282


$
282


$
3,017


$
16,762Ratio of earnings to fixed charges*


42.2



187.9



222.0



22.9



(14.8
)     (1)
    
    Amortization of debt issuance costs is included in interest
    expense.(2)
    
    Preference security dividend requirements for purposes of
    computing fixed charges is defined as the amount of preference
    earnings that is required to pay dividends on outstanding
    preference securities. The dividend requirements are computed as
    the amount of the dividend divided by (1 minus the effective
    income tax rate applicable to continuing operations).*
    
    Our consolidated ratios of earnings to fixed charges plus
    preferred stock dividends for the years ended December 31,
    2005, 2006 and 2007 is identical to our consolidated ratios of
    earnings to fixed charges as we did not have any outstanding
    preference securities dividends during the periods indicated.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-2548

INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN’S ASSOCIATION,

Local 333, AFL-CIO; DOUGLAS F. WAGNER, JR.,

individually and in the capacity of President

of International Longshoremen’s Association;

CLIFTON G. GROSS, individually and in the

capacity of Vice President of International

Longshoremen’s Association,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

versus

INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN’S ASSOCIATION, AFLCIO; RICHARD P. HUGHES, JR., individually and

in the capacity of General International Vice

President, International Longshoremen’s Association; HORACE T. ALSTON, individually and in

the capacity of International Vice President,

International Longshoremen’s Association; INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN’S ASSOCIATION, Local

2066, AFL-CIO,

Defendants - Appellees.

STEAMSHIP TRADE ASSOCIATION OF BALTIMORE,

INC.,

Movant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-99-

2653-L)
2

Submitted: April 28, 2000 Decided: June 6, 2000

Before LUTTIG and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joel A. Smith, Travis M. Mastroddi, KAHN, SMITH & COLLINS, P.A.,

Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellants. Ernest L. Mathews, Jr., Rania

V. Sedhom, GLEASON & MATHEWS, P.C., New York, New York; James R.

Rosenberg, ABATO, RUBENSTEIN & ABATO, P.A., Baltimore, Maryland,

for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
3

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court’s order denying its

motion for preliminary injunction. We have reviewed the record and

the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. We find

that the district court did not clearly err in finding that Appellants would not likely suffer irreparable injury during the

course of litigating this action. See Sampson v. Murray, 415 U.S.

61, 90 (1974). Accordingly, we affirm substantially on the reasoning of the district court. See International Longshoremen’s

Ass’n, Loc. 333, AFL-CIO v. International Longshoremen’s Ass’n,

AFL-CIO No. CA-99-2653 (D. Md. Nov. 2, 1999). 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.

AFFIRMED
§ 30.807 What factual evidence does OWCP use to determine a covered Part E employee's average annual wage? ( a ) OWCP may rely on annual or quarterly wage information reported to the Social Security Administration to establish a covered Part E employee's presumed average annual wage (see § 30.810) and the duration and extent of any years of wage-loss that are compensable under Part E of the Act (see § 30.811). OWCP may also rely on other probative evidence of a covered Part E employee's wages, and may ask the claimant for additional evidence needed to make this determination, if necessary. For the purposes of making these two types of determinations, OWCP will consider all monetary payments that the covered Part E employee received as wages (see § 30.801(g)).
( b ) A claimant who disagrees with the evidence OWCP has obtained under paragraph (a) of this section and alleges a different average annual wage for the covered Part E employee, or that there was a greater duration or extent of wage-loss, may submit records that were produced in the ordinary course of business due to the employee's employment to rebut that evidence, to the extent that such records are determined to be authentic by OWCP. The average annual wage and/or wage-loss of the covered Part E employee will then be determined by OWCP in the exercise of its discretion.
[84 FR 3059, Feb. 8, 2019]
Exhibit 32.2


SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350 OF CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED
STATES CODE

I, Stanley J. Talbi, certify that (i) MetLife Insurance Company of
Connecticuts Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30,
2008 (the Form 10-Q) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information
contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of MetLife Insurance Company of
Connecticut.

Date: August 11, 2008

| |                                                                     
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------
| | /s/ Stanley J. Talbi                                                
| | Stanley J. TalbiExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and will be retained
by MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Adrian Diaz GONZALEZ, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 05-72931.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 12, 2006.*

Filed June 22, 2006.

Adrian Diaz Gonzalez, Bloomington, CA, pro se.

CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel, Department of *537Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Jennifer L. Light-body, Esq., San Francisco, CA, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: KLEINFELD, PAEZ, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Adrian Diaz Gonzalez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision affirming an immigration judge’s denial of his application for cancellation of removal. Diaz contends that the Board and the IJ erred in concluding that his departure to Mexico in 1994 interrupted his continuous physical presence in the United States. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we grant the petition.

An alien who departs the United States pursuant to an administrative voluntary departure in lieu of deportation or removal proceedings interrupts his physical presence in this country. *Vasquez-Lopez v. Ashcroft,*343 F.3d 961, 972 (9th Cir.2003) (per curiam). After the Board issued its decision, we held, however, that an alien’s brief return to his native country for family reasons does not interrupt his continuous physical presence even if he is stopped and turned away at the border when he attempts to return.

Diaz testified that he went to Mexico for two weeks in April 1994. When he attempted to return to the United States, he was caught at the border and was detained for about seven hours. He testified that he “signed a document for voluntary departed.” When the immigration judge asked, “And you chose to voluntary depart instead of being deported?” Diaz answered, Wes.”

On this record, we cannot determine whether Diaz received administrative voluntary departure under threat of deportation. We therefore grant the petition and remand for further proceedings concerning the nature of his contact with immigration officials in 1994 and such further proceedings as may be appropriate. *See IbarraFlores v. Gonzales,*439 F.3d 614, 620 (9th Cir .2006).

PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; 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.