alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 21.2 Scope of regulations. The provisions of this part apply to all recreation or conservation areas administered by the Department of the Interior, including recreation or conservation areas leased or transferred for administration to other Federal and non-Federal public agencies, wherever the Department of the Interior retains jurisdiction over the issuance of cabin site permits by such other agencies. The provisions of this part do not modify or cancel any existing arrangement whereby the Department of the Interior or bureau or office thereof has leased, or turned over for administration, a public recreation or conservation area to another Federal or non-Federal public agency. The provisions of this part will also provide policy guidelines for the Departmental handling of assignments, amendments, or modifications of existing permits or agreements, but do not apply to areas transferred by deed where the United States retains a reversionary interest, nor to areas of the National Park System other than those where private cabin sites are located. ( a ) The policies set out in this part shall not affect occupancy by private persons who have private rights, or rights of occupancy adjudicated or confirmed by court action, statute, or pursuant to a contract by which they conveyed to the Government the land on which a cabin or other substantial improvement is located.
( b ) The policies set out in this part shall not apply to any concession contract or to any other permit or occupancy primarily granted to serve public rather than private or individual purposes—such as, permits granted to groups who assist in maintaining historic trails, or permits for youth and church group camp facilities, etc.
( c ) The regulations in this part shall not supersede or substantially contravene the implementation of the Lower Colorado River Land Use Plan.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         132,341
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  114,708
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               706,478
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,917,199
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,957
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        81,922
<OTHER-SE>                                  12,587,628
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,917,199
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               114,708
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   28,445
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                110,343
<INCOME-TAX>                                   110,343
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   110,343
<EPS-BASIC>                                       .015
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .015


</TABLE>
#### § 726.211 Name of one employer only shall be given in each report.

A separate report of the issuance or renewal of a policy and endorsement, provided for by § 726.208, shall be made for each operator covered by a policy. If a policy is issued or renewed insuring more than one operator, a separate report for each operator so covered shall be sent to the Office with the name of only one operator on each such report.
(No. 807

Claimant awarded $130.34 with, interest.)

#### Lilian C. Emery, Executrix, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed September 16, 1924.*

Inheritance *tax*— when *refund may be made*— Sec. *25.*Where an inheritance tax has been assessed under Section 25, Inheritance Tax Law, and is paid, and upon the happening of certain contingencies expressed in the will, a petition was filed praying for the re-assessment of the tax, and upon a hearing thereon the tax is assessed at a less rate, claimant is entitled to a refund of the difference between the amount of the tax paid and the amount found due upon the re-assessment.

Sonnenschein, Berkson, Lautmann & Levinson, for claimant.

Edward J. Brundage, Attorney General; George C. Dixon, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

Mr. Justice Phillips

delivered the opinion of the court:

This is for claim for refund of inheritance tax erroneously paid to the State of Illinois. William R. Emery died March 13,1919, leaving a last will and testament with codicil thereto, which were admitted to probate in Cook County, Illinois.

The petitioner is the widow of said deceased. In an order duly entered of record by the county judge September 19, 1919, fixing amount of inheritance tax to be paid at $1304.20, being the amount less 5% discount allowed by statute, July 21, 1920, the estate was declared closed and executrix discharged.

On account of the happenings of certain contingencies expressed in the will, a copy of which is filed as evidence in the case, under Section 25 of Revenue act, the claimant became entitled to a re-assessment of the inheritance taxes. Thereupon June 17,1924, the claimant filed her petition in said ■ county court of Cook County, praying for a re-assessment in accordance with the statute in such case made and provided; and ah order was made re-assessing said inheritance tax at $1235.64 less the 5% discount allowed by statute, which equaled $1173.86. The amount of tax actually paid therefore was $1304.20. It is therefore clear that the claimant is entitled to a refund of $130.34, with interest thereon from September 19,1919, at 3% per annum.

The claimant is accordingly awarded the sum of $130.34 with 3% thereon per annum from September 19/1919.
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

DAY ELEV

 839.80

 839.90

 839.95

 840.00

 840.04

 840.06

 840.06

 840.18

 840.38

 840.55

 840.56

 840.53

 840.52

 840.51

 840.48

 840.44

 840.34

 840.29

 840.24

 840.19

 840.15

 840.12

 840.12

 839.95

 839.12

 838.80

 838.50

 838.28

 838.12

 48.84

 48.97

 49.03

 49.09

 49.15

 49.17

 49.17

 49.33

 49.58

 49.80

 49.82

 49.78

 49.76

 49.75

 49.71

 49.66

 49.53

 49.47

 49.40

 49.34

 49.29

 49.25

 49.25

 49.03

 47.98

 47.57

 47.20

 46.92

 46.72

STORAGE

+0.18

+0.13

+0.06

+0.06

+0.05

+0.03

+0.00

+0.16

+0.26

+0.22

+0.01

-0.04

-0.01

-0.01

-0.04

-0.05

-0.13

-0.06

-0.07

-0.06

-0.05

-0.04

+0.00

-0.22

-1.05

-0.40

-0.38

-0.28

-0.20

CHANGE

234

207

180

176

172

156

143

165

162

138

149

123

137

141

129

117

81

114

113

114

122

128

147

223

-203

125

140

193

240

INFLOW

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

 20

SPILL

 117

 117

 117

 117

 117

 117

 117

 63

 8

 6

 117

 117

 117

 117

 117

 117

 117

 117

 117

 117

 117

 117

 117

 301

 301

 301

 301

 301

 317

OUTLET

 7

 6

 11

 7

 9

 6

 6

 4

 4

 2

 5

 6

 7

 11

 11

 6

 9

 9

 9

 9

 11

 10

 10

 12

 7

 8

 8

 11

 4

C.F.S.

 .18

 .15

 .28

 .17

 .23

 .15

 .15

 .09

 .09

 .04

 .12

 .15

 .16

 .27

 .26

 .15

 .21

 .22

 .23

 .23

 .28

 .24

 .24

 .29

 .17

 .21

 .21

 .27

 .11

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .05

 .02

 .13

 .02

 .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-ORLAND PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

APRIL 2009 RUN DATE: 05/01/2009

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS -1.93 4,066 4,239 580 225 5.55 .22

ACRE-FEET -1,930 8,065 8,408 1,150 446

COMMENTS:

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

DATA BASED ON 24 HOUR PERIOD ENDING 0800 HOURS.

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

SPILL 1,150

OUTLET

TOTAL

 8,408

 9,558

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 .22

JULY 1, 2008 12.10

 48.66

STONY GORGE RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS
#### William Theile, Respondent, v. Samuel J. Dill, Appellant.

Determination affirmed, with costs. Ho opinion. Present—Ingraham, P. J., Laughlin, Clarke, Scott and Dowling, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule contains summary information extracted from the consolidated
balance sheet and the consolidated statement of operations and is qualified in 
its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                    JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                          1,123,645
<SECURITIES>                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                   1,315,624
<ALLOWANCES>                    76,969
<INVENTORY>                     0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                2,606,824
<PP&E>                          2,625,678
<DEPRECIATION>                  2,319,145
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  7,793,191
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           2,358,095
<BONDS>                         3,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0
<PREFERRED>                     0
<COMMON>                        173,543
<OTHER-SE>                      2,261,553
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    7,793,191
<SALES>                         0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                2,220,914
<CGS>                           0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   2,549,065
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                2,268,292
<LOSS-PROVISION>                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 (2,596,443)
<INCOME-TAX>                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             (2,596,443)
<DISCONTINUED>                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0
<CHANGES>                       0
<NET-INCOME>                    (2,596,443)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                   (.16)
<EPS-DILUTED>                   (.16)
        

</TABLE>
### §1486. Loans ineligible for guaranty or insurance

Loans made by any agency or instrumentality of the Federal Government (not including an eligible Community Development Finance Institution), or by an organization of Indians from funds borrowed from the United States, and loans the interest on which is not included in gross income for the purposes of chapter 1 of title 26 shall not be eligible for guaranty or insurance hereunder.

(Pub. L. 93–262, title II, §206, Apr. 12, 1974, 88 Stat. 80; Pub. L. 99–514, §2, Oct. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 2095; Pub. L. 109–221, title IV, §401(c), May 12, 2006, 120 Stat. 342.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2006—Pub. L. 109–221 inserted "(not including an eligible Community Development Finance Institution)" after "Government".

1986—Pub. L. 99–514 substituted "Internal Revenue Code of 1986" for "Internal Revenue Code of 1954", which for purposes of codification was translated as "title 26" thus requiring no change in text.
### §2015. Annual report; audits

#### (a) Annual reports

The Secretary shall submit to each appropriate committee of Congress, all Bureau-funded schools, and the tribal governing bodies of such schools, a detailed annual report on the state of education within the Bureau, and any problems encountered in Indian education during the period covered by the report, that includes—

(1) suggestions for the improvement of the Bureau educational system and for increasing tribal or local Indian control of such system; and

(2) information on the status of tribally controlled community colleges.

#### (b) Budget request

The annual budget request for the education programs of the Bureau, as submitted as part of the President's next annual budget request under section 1105 of title 31 shall include the plans required by sections 2001(c), 2002(c), and 2004(c) 1 of this title.

#### (c) Financial and compliance audits

The Inspector General of the Department of the Interior shall establish a system to ensure that financial and compliance audits, based upon the extent to which a school described in subsection (a) has complied with the local financial plan under section 2010 of this title, are conducted of each Bureau-operated school at least once every 3 years.

#### (d) Administrative evaluation of schools

The Director shall, at least once every 3 to 5 years, conduct a comprehensive evaluation of Bureau-operated schools. Such evaluation shall be in addition to any other program review or evaluation that may be required under Federal law.

(Pub. L. 95–561, title XI, §1135, as added Pub. L. 107–110, title X, §1042, Jan. 8, 2002, 115 Stat. 2056.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 2015, Pub. L. 95–561, title XI, §1135, as added Pub. L. 103–382, title III, §381, Oct. 20, 1994, 108 Stat. 4010, related to uniform education procedures and practices, prior to the general amendment of this chapter by Pub. L. 107–110.

Another prior section 2015, Pub. L. 95–561, title XI, §1135, Nov. 1, 1978, 92 Stat. 2327, related to recruitment policy for Indian educators and promotion plan for Bureau employees, prior to the general amendment of this chapter by Pub. L. 103–382.

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

#### Effective Date

Section 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 a note under section 6301 of Title 20, Education.

1 So in original. Probably should be "2005(c)".
### §1300g–3. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 100–89, title I, §104, Aug. 18, 1987, 101 Stat. 667, which related to State and tribal authority, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Pablo GONZALEZ, Appellant.

No. 05-1747.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 15, 2006.

Decided Feb. 28, 2006.

Wendy L. Johnson, U.S. Attorneys Office, Fort Smith, AR, for Appellee.

Jenniffer Morris Horan, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Little Rock, AR, John B. Schisler, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Fayetteville, AR, for Appellant.

Pablo Gonzalez, Bentonville, AR, pro se.

Before ARNOLD, BYE, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Pablo Gonzalez appeals the 77-month sentence the district court1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to illegal reentry after deportation following a conviction for an aggravated felony, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2).

For reversal, Gonzalez argues that the court violated the Sixth Amendment by imposing an enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)(i) (16-level enhancement if defendant previously was deported after conviction for felony drug-trafficking offense for which sentence exceeded 13 months), based on judge-found facts as to the nature of his prior convictions. We have already rejected a similar Sixth Amendment challenge. *See United States v. Torres-Alvarado,*416 F.3d 808, 810-11 (8th Cir.2005).

Gonzalez also argues that the district court erred in imposing the enhancement because in so doing it considered challenged information in the presentence report (PSR), and the district court did not limit its inquiry to the documents listed as permissible by the Supreme Court in *Shepard v. United States,*544 U.S. 13, 125 S.Ct. 1254, 1263, 161 L.Ed.2d 205 (2005) (court may not look beyond charging document, plea agreement, or guilty-plea transcript of colloquy in which factual basis for plea was confirmed by defendant, or to some comparable judicial record, to determine whether conviction is violent felony). We reject these arguments as well. First, Gonzalez made blanket objections to the PSR paragraphs detailing his drug-trafficking convictions, as part of his argument that the section 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)(i) enhancement was not proper because the court would have to make findings on the nature of the convictions. He never contended that the convictions did not exist, and in fact he stipulated at sentencing that if the probation officer were to testify, the testimony would support the factual assertions in the PSR. *See United States v. Cullen,*432 F.3d 903, 905 (8th Cir.2006) (district court may rely on unobjected-to facts in PSR). Second, because the district court concluded, based on unobjected-to information in the PSR, that Gonzalez had a drug-trafficking conviction for which he was sentenced to more than 13 months, *491Gonzalez’s reliance on *Shepard*is misplaced.

Accordingly, we affirm.

1

. The Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas.
Table 25

U. S. Department of Interior - Bureau of Reclamation

Preliminary Data Subject to Change Central Valley Operations Office

 Delta-Mendota Canal

Monthly Deliveries in AF 2017

Water User Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total

Tracy, City of 0 0 0 0 485 606 877 1,137 922 819 294 0 5,140

Byron Bethany ID (formerly Plainview WD) 1 2 148 408 930 1,014 1,067 838 480 319 115 87 5,409

West Side ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Banta Carbona ID 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

West Stanislaus ID 0 0 2 2,129 5,955 0 91 0 2 0 129 1,058 9,366

Patterson WD 0 0 321 947 3,178 214 51 231 2,315 738 143 1,391 9,529

Del Puerto WD 5 13 1,091 4,345 9,091 10,972 12,561 8,804 5,507 3,703 1,110 1,292 58,494

San Luis WD - Ag 0 79 704 395 877 1,525 1,456 1,097 436 257 52 361 7,239

San Luis WD - M&I 0 1 0 1 14 12 12 12 8 7 0 1 68

Panoche WD - Ag 1 3 117 879 3,193 4,487 2,064 3,001 2,151 731 674 89 17,390

Panoche WD - M&I 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 24

Eagle Field WD 0 381 45 2 390 516 738 550 1 115 14 692 3,444

Oro Loma WD 0 1 0 18 35 40 53 39 9 0 0 0 195

Mercy Springs WD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Newman Wasteway Recirculation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

USBR/DWR Intertie @ MP7.70-R to 

CA Aqueduct 22,969 25,625 22,466 28,083 10 20,424 17,111 21,226 14,525 28,585 10,465 21,879 233,368

Total 22,978 26,107 24,896 37,209 24,160 39,814 36,083 36,937 26,358 35,276 12,998 26,852 349,668

Exchange Contractors

Central California ID (Abv CK 13) 0 0 212 670 1,670 1,362 1,737 1,442 926 985 570 590 10,164

Central California ID (Blw CK 13) 0 0 1,111 510 2,303 19,094 23,731 17,651 2,425 283 2,624 416 70,148

Firebaugh Canal Co 0 295 563 743 1,139 2,663 4,590 2,512 751 562 1,080 1,448 16,346

Total 0 295 1,886 1,923 5,112 23,119 30,058 21,605 4,102 1,830 4,274 2,454 96,658

Refuges

China Island Unit (CDFG) (76.05 & CCID) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 194 0 0 513 889 1,596

Los Banos WMA (CDFG) (76.05 & CCID) 0 0 0 0 432 0 0 1,182 982 1,480 1,325 1,338 6,739

Salt Slough Unit (CDFG) (76.05 & CCID) 0 0 0 0 312 0 0 1,470 1,060 1,040 1,008 994 5,884

Volta WMA (CDFG) (Volta Wasteway) 0 0 0 0 0 0 348 1,583 2,550 2,449 335 460 7,725

Grasslands WD (76.05 & CCID) 0 0 0 0 8,884 0 0 8,540 20,313 18,668 9,877 5,999 72,281

Grasslands WD (Volta Wasteway) 0 0 0 0 4,681 0 0 1,225 13,823 12,167 335 460 32,691

Kesterson Unit (USFWS) (76.05 & CCID) 0 0 0 0 564 0 0 279 817 1,222 836 732 4,450

Kesterson Unit (USFWS) (Volta Wasteway) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Freitas Unit (USFWS) (76.05 & CCID) 0 0 0 0 467 0 0 0 328 876 859 828 3,358

Total 0 0 0 0 15,340 0 348 14,473 39,873 37,902 15,088 11,700 134,724

Total DMC Deliveries 22,978 26,402 26,782 39,132 44,612 62,933 66,489 73,015 70,333 75,008 32,360 41,006 581,050

O'Neill Net Pumping 205,309 188,222 196,078 192,367 94,432 184,998 110,332 62,736 74,029 109,329 104,950 174,859 1,697,641

DMC plus O'Neill Net Pumping 228,287 214,624 222,860 231,499 139,044 247,931 176,821 135,751 144,362 184,337 137,310 215,865 2,278,691

* Delivery data is based on District turn-out readings and may include water in addition to water service contract deliveries.
#### **Exhibit 32.1**

#### ** **

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.**

**SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906**

**OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Annual Report ofLiquidmetal Technologies, Inc. (the “company”) on Form 10-K for theyear ending December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we, Larry Buffington, President /Chief Executive Officer, and Gerald Morrow, Chief Financial Officer, of thecompany, certify, pursuant to and for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

 

(1) The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the company.

 

 
| Date: April 3, 2008 | By:    | /s/ Larry E. Buffington |
|---------------------|--------|-------------------------|
|                |   | Larry E. Buffington     |
|                |   | President and CEO       |
|                |   |                    |
|                |   |                    |
| Date: April 3, 2008 | By:    | /s/ Gerald E. Morrow    |
|                |   | Gerald E. Morrow        |
|                |   | CFO                     |

 

 

A signed original of this written statementrequired by Section 906 has been provided to Liquidmetal Technologies, Inc.and will be retained by Liquidmetal Technologies, Inc. and furnished tothe Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----