alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gaudencio VILLA-GUTIERREZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-40946.

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided Feb. 23, 2006.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, H. Michael Sokolow, Laura Fletcher Leavitt, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Gaudencio Villa-Gutierrez pleaded guilty to being found in the United States after deportation and was sentenced to 30 months of imprisonment and two years of supervised release.

Villa-Gutierrez argues that the district court erred in treating his prior state conviction for attempted possession of narcotic drugs as an aggravated felony. He concedes that his argument is foreclosed *186by current Fifth Circuit law, citing *United States v. Rivera,*265 F.3d 310, 312-13 (5th Cir.2001) and *United States v. Hinojosa-Lopez,*130 F.3d 691, 693-94 (5th Cir.1997). Thus, the district court did not err in applying the eight-level adjustment to his offense level pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(C) based on his prior state felony drug conviction. *United States v. Villegas,*404 F.3d 355, 359 (5th Cir.2005). *Jerome v. United States,*318 U.S. 101, 63 S.Ct. 483, 87 L.Ed. 640 (1943) does not affect the binding precedential value of *Rivera*and *Hinojosa-Lopez.*

Villa-Gutierrez argues that the felony and aggravated felony provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and (2) are unconstitutional. Specifically, he argues that the viability of *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), is in doubt in light of later Supreme Court cases.

Villa-Gutierrez’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by *Almendarez-Torres.*Although Villa-Gutierrez contends that *Almendarez-Torres*was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule *Almendarez-Torres*in light of *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that *Almendarez-Torres*remains binding. *See United States v. Garza-Lopez,*410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), *cert. denied,*— U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 298, 163 L.Ed.2d 260 (2005). Villa-Gutierrez properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of *Almendarez-Torres*and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review.

AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
§ 3508.22 What happens if BLM rejects my bid? ( a ) If your bid is the high bid and we reject it because you did not sign the lease form and pay the balance of the bonus bid, or otherwise comply with this subpart, you forfeit to the United States your deposit of one-fifth of the bonus bid amount.
( b ) If we must reject your high bid for reasons beyond your control, we will return your bid deposit.
( c ) If we reject your bid because it is not the high bid, we will return your bid deposit.
Sacramento

River

CCOOLLUUSSAA CC OO

SSUUTTTTEE RR CCOO

T15N R1W T15N R

79.0 L

23 24

13 14

26 25

22

15

27

19

18

30

Sycamore

Meridian

Contract No. 14-06-200-7572A-R-1

Exhibit B

Hale, Judith and Marks, Alice

725-202-63

Note: The Public Land Survey depicted here

was digitized from USGS topographic maps.

Contractor's Service Area

Point of Diversion

0 0.25 0.5

Miles

Date: November 8, 2004

File Name: N:\districts\contracts\hale_judith_and_marks_alice_7572\hale_judith_and_marks_alice.mxd
# ZuWerks UAS Details and Capabilities

DJI Phantom

• Failsafe & auto go home/landing

• Intelligent Orientation Control (IOC)

• Max height set to 400ft in OS Year Purchased : 201 3

TAG: ZuQuad 1

Model: DJI Phantom 1

Motors: 4 @ 250w ea

Battery Type: 3S LiPo

Flight Time: <1 0 min

Take Off Weight: <1000g

Max Ascent/Descent Speed: 6m/s

Max Flight Velocity: 10m/s

Camera: GoPro 3 Black



## DJI S800 EVO

• Extremely Stable in windy conditions

• Failsafe & auto go home/landing Year Purchased : 2013

TAG: ZuHex

Model: DJI S800 EVO

Motors: 6 @ 500w ea

Battery Type: 6S LiPo

Flight Time: <12 min

Take Off Weight: <8kg

Max Ascent/Descent Speed: 10 m/s

Max Flight Velocity: 25 m/s

Camera: Sony NEX

- 7



## DJI Inspire 1

• Failsafe & auto go home/landing

• Intelligent Orientation Control (IOC)

• Built in Flight Control App

• Max height set to 400ft in OS Year Purchased : 2015

TAG: ZuQuad 2

Model: DJI Inspire 1

Motors: 4 @ 495 w ea

Battery Type: 6S LiPo

Flight Time: <18 min

Take Off Weight: <3000g

Max Ascent/Descent Speed: 5m/s

Max Flig ht Velocity: 22m/s

Camera: DJI X3 FC350
Case 1:20-cv-21994-KMW Document 24-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/14/2020 Page 1 of 4
Case 1:20-cv-21994-KMW Document 24-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/14/2020 Page 2 of 4
Case 1:20-cv-21994-KMW Document 24-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/14/2020 Page 3 of 4
Case 1:20-cv-21994-KMW Document 24-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/14/2020 Page 4 of 4
### **Subchapter D—Occupational Tax**

Sec.
5731.
Imposition and rate of tax.
5732.
Payment of tax.
5733.
Provisions relating to liability for occupational taxes.
5734.
Application of State laws.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior subchapter D, relating to records of manufacturers and importers of tobacco products, etc., was redesignated subchapter E by Pub. L. 100–203, title X, §10512(f)(1), Dec. 22, 1987, 101 Stat. 1330–449.

Another prior subchapter D, which consisted of sections 5731 and 5732 of this title, was repealed by Pub. L. 89–44, title V, §502(b)(7), June 21, 1965, 79 Stat. 151, applicable on and after Jan. 1, 1966.

#### Amendments

**2005**—Pub. L. 109–59, title XI, §11125(b)(20)(D), Aug. 10, 2005, 119 Stat. 1957, added items 5732 to 5734.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                       5
<CIK>                           0000894738
<NAME>                          Internet Commerce Corporation
<MULTIPLIER>                    1

<S>                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               JUL-31-2001
<PERIOD-END>                    OCT-31-2000
<CASH>                          11,190,610
<SECURITIES>                    953,970
<RECEIVABLES>                   725,662
<ALLOWANCES>                    84,474
<INVENTORY>                     0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                12,981,659
<PP&E>                          2,140,254
<DEPRECIATION>                  1,073,875
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  22,856,543
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           2,100,909
<BONDS>                         188,912
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0
<PREFERRED>                     106
<COMMON>                        66,886
<OTHER-SE>                      20,475,011
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    20,542,003
<SALES>                         1,316,385
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                1,316,385
<CGS>                           0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   4,798,602
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              201,863
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 (3,280,354)
<INCOME-TAX>                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             (3,280,354)
<DISCONTINUED>                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0
<CHANGES>                       0
<NET-INCOME>                    (3,280,354)
<EPS-BASIC>                     (0.51)
<EPS-DILUTED>                   (0.51)


</TABLE>
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

Mr. David M. Berchowitz 

CTO 

Global Cooling Inc. 

6000 Poston Road 

Athens, Ohio 45701 

o::c 1 2 2013 

OFFICE OF 

AIR AND RADIATION 

Re: Completeness Determination for SNAP Submission for R-170 (Ethane) in Very Low 

Temperature Refrigeration 

Dear Mr. Berchowitz: 

Thank you for Global Cooling's submission to the Environmental Protection Agency for R-170 

(ethane) in very low temperature refrigeration. The EPA established the Significant New 

Alternatives Policy program to implement section 612 of the Clean Air Act. Your submission 

and the additional information received September 12, 2013, has been reviewed for 

completeness. We find the information to be complete. 

Here is a summary of information concerning your submission: 

Substitute name: R-170 (Ethane) 

Substance(s) the substitute will replace: CFC-13, R-503, CFC-113, R-13B1 

Sector: Refrigeration and Air Conditioning 

End-uses: Very Low Temperature Refrigeration, Non-Mechanical Heat Transfer 

New or retrofit usage: new only 

Date received: August 8, 2012 

Most recent update received: September 12, 2013 

Status of submission: complete 

Based on review of the most recent information, your submission has been found complete. 

Pending EPA's decision concerning the substitute's acceptability, you may now sell and import 

R -170 for use in the end uses above. You may also sell, import and export very low temperature 

refrigeration equipment containing R-170. 

Internet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov 

Recycled/Recyclable · Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer. Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paper 
If you have questions about your submission, please contact me at (202) 343-9445 or 

vondemhagen.rebecca@epa. gov. 

Sincerely, 

~ ,Ha=-i= 

Rebecca von dem Hagen 

Alternatives and Emissions Reduction Branch 

Stratospheric Protection Division
#### Kener, administrator, *v.*La Grange Mills.

February 17, 1911.

Complaint- for land. Before Judge Freeman. Troup superior court. November 30, 1909.

*W. PL. Terrell,*for plaintiff. *F. M. Jjongley,*for defendant.

Fish, C. J.

An exemption in bankruptcy, made under tlie constitution of< 1868, is subject to a judgment founded on/ a debt contracted prior to the adoption of spell constitution. The proceedings in bankruptcy d'o not affect the creditor, he not having proved his debt nor otherwise submitted his claim to the bankrupt court. *Hiley*v. *Bridges,*60 *Ga.*375; *Shipp*v. *Smith,*76 *Ga.*1; *Dozier*v. *McWhorter,*113 *Ga.*584 (39 S. E. 106).

*(a)*Applying the ruling above announced1 to the facts as agreed upon in the present case, the court did not err in rendering the judgment of which complaint is made. *Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur,*
#### William C. Cairns, as Administrator, etc., of John A. Cairns, Deceased, Appellant, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent.

Judgement and order unanimously affirmed, with costs.
http://www.regulations.gov/

fdmspublic/component/main?main=

DocketDetail&d=APHIS-2009-0034) to

http://www.aphis.usda.gov).
Exhibit 32.2







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 the Annual Report of Cal Bay International, Inc. a Nevada corporation (the Company), on Form 10-KSB for the annual period ending December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Charles A. Prebay, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to my knowledge:



(1) The 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 Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.









/s/Charles A. Prebay

Chief Financial Officer

Date: March 26, 2004
#### Margaret Boyle, Respondent, v. Samuel Kraut et al., Individually and as Copartners Doing Business under the Name of 5th Avenue Plumbing Supply *858Company, et al., Appellants.

(Appeal No. 1.) —

Action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff when a trolley car of defendant city, on which she was a passenger, collided with an automobile truck owned and operated by defendants Kraut. Judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered on the verdict of a jury, unanimously affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — Lewis, P. J., Johnston, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsThe 30-GHz monolithic receive moduleThe fourth year progress is described on a program to develop a 27.5 to 30 GHz GaAs monolithic receive module for spaceborne-communication antenna feed array applications, and to deliver submodules for experimental evaluation. Program goals include an overall receive module noise figure of 5 dB, a 30 dB RF to IF gain with six levels of intermediate gain control, a five bit phase shifter, and a maximum power consumption of 250 mW. Submicron gate length single and dual gate FETs are described and applied in the development of monolithic gain control amplifiers and low noise amplifiers. A two-stage monolithic gain control amplifier based on ion implanted dual gate MESFETs was designed and fabricated. The gain control amplifier has a gain of 12 dB at 29 GHz with a gain control range of over 13 dB. A two-stage monolithic low noise amplifier based on ion implanted MESFETs which provides 7 dB gain with 6.2 dB noise figure at 29 GHz was also developed. An interconnected receive module containing LNA, gain control, and phase shifter submodules was built using the LNA and gain control ICs as well as a monolithic phase shifter developed previously under this program. The design, fabrication, and evaluation of this interconnected receiver is presented. Progress in the development of an RF/IF submodule containing a unique ion implanted diode mixer diode and a broadband balanced mixer monolithic IC with on-chip IF amplifier and the initial design of circuits for the RF portion of a two submodule receiver are also discussed.Document ID19900015212Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsBauhahn, P.*(Honeywell, Inc. Bloomington, MN, United States)*Geddes, J.*(Honeywell, Inc. Bloomington, MN, United States)*Sokolov, V.*(Honeywell, Inc. Bloomington, MN, United States)*Contolatis, T.*(Honeywell, Inc. Bloomington, MN, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateApril 1, 1988Subject CategoryCommunications And RadarReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.26:180849NASA-CR-180849Accession Number90N24528Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS3-23356Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19900015212.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
### §268. Sale of land with unharvested crop

Where an unharvested crop sold by the taxpayer is considered under the provisions of section 1231 as "property used in the trade or business", in computing taxable income no deduction (whether or not for the taxable year of the sale and whether for expenses, depreciation, or otherwise) attributable to the production of such crop shall be allowed.

(Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 80.)
<Page>



                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, John Perrachon, Chief Executive Officer of TouchTunes Music Corporation ("the
Company"), have reviewed the quarterly report of the Company on Form 10-Q for
the quarter ending March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), and based on the inquiries I have
made or caused to be made in the fulfillment of my responsibilities as the Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, I hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that for
the periods covered by the Report:

     (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


/s/ John Perrachon
----------------------------
John Perrachon
Chief Executive Officer
May 16, 2005

THIS CERTIFICATE IS BEING MADE FOR THE EXCLUSIVE PURPOSE OF COMPLIANCE BY THE
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE COMPANY WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF SECTION 906, AND
SHALL NOT BE DEEMED TO BE A PART OF THE REPORT OR FILED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE.
A SIGNED ORIGINAL OF THIS WRITTEN STATEMENT REQUIRED BY SECTION 906 HAS BEEN
PROVIDED TO THE COMPANY AND WILL BE RETAINED BY THE COMPANY AND FURNISHED TO THE
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OR ITS STAFF UPON REQUEST.
MAR

APR

MAY

JUN

JUL

AUG

SEP

OCT

NOV

DEC

JAN

FEB

Contractor Name: Contract Number:

By: Date:

Addendum A

Water Schedule

Water Year

2004

Current Schedule Revised Schedule

00 00

TOTAL

AG M&I AG M&I
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

JULIUS DARNELL ROBERTS,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 12-30031

D.C. No. 2:02-cr-00282-FVS

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Washington

Fred L. Van Sickle, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted September 10, 2012** 

Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Julius Darnell Roberts appeals from the district court’s order denying his 18

U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for reduction of sentence. We have jurisdiction under

28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

FILED

SEP 21 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 12-30031

Roberts contends that the district court abused its discretion by denying his

motion to reduce his sentence because the court double counted his criminal

history and failed to consider adequately his post-conviction rehabilitation. The

court considered Roberts’s post-conviction rehabilitation and properly based its

decision on public safety considerations and the need for deterrence. See U.S.S.G.

§ 1B1.10 cmt. n.1(B); United States v. Lightfoot, 626 F.3d 1092, 1096 (9th Cir.

2010).

AFFIRMED.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 20-21859-CIV-ALTONAGA/Goodman

In the Matter of the Complaint for Exoneration

from or Limitation of Liability by Jose Garcia,

as owner of the 2019 40’ Beneteau Motor Yacht 

bearing Hull Identification No. BENER159L819,

Petitioner.

_________________________________________/

PARTIAL FINAL DEFAULT JUDGMENT

Pursuant to the Court’s Order [ECF No. 137] granting Petitioner, Jose Garcia’s Motion for 

Entry of Final Default Judgment of Exoneration against All Non-Appearing Potential Claimants

[ECF No. 136], it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that a judgment of exoneration by default is hereby 

entered in favor of Petitioner, Jose Garcia, and against all non-appearing potential claimants.

DONE AND ORDERED in Miami, Florida, this 20th day of November, 2020. 

 _________________________________

 CECILIA M. ALTONAGA

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

cc: counsel of record

Case 1:20-cv-21859-CMA Document 138 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/20/2020 Page 1 of 1
#### § 3514.12 What additional information should I include in a request for partial relinquishment?

Any partial relinquishment must also clearly describe the lands you are relinquishing and give the exact area involved.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    3-MOS            3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2001      JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-2000      JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000      SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                      13,412,262       13,831,792
<SECURITIES>                                         0                0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,783,231        2,193,639
<ALLOWANCES>                                   137,538          125,409
<INVENTORY>                                    932,162        1,119,844
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            17,934,309       17,995,134
<PP&E>                                         232,958          231,933
<DEPRECIATION>                                  95,190          121,251
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              18,584,833       18,668,379
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,295,297        2,191,299
<BONDS>                                              0                0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                0
<COMMON>                                        10,275           10,275
<OTHER-SE>                                  16,279,261       16,466,805
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                18,584,833       18,668,379
<SALES>                                      4,033,337        2,639,515
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,033,337        2,639,515
<CGS>                                        2,861,755        2,028,903
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,861,755        2,028,903
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (200,726)         (21,410)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (187,544)        (348,102)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (187,544)        (348,102)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                0
<CHANGES>                                            0                0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (187,544)        (348,102)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.02)           (0.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.02)           (0.06)


</TABLE>
### Subpart F—Rules for Computing Work Opportunity Credit

Sec.
51.
Amount of credit.
[51A.
Repealed.]
52.
Special rules.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**2006**—Pub. L. 109–432, div. A, title I, §105(e)(4)(B), Dec. 20, 2006, 120 Stat. 2937, struck out item 51A "Temporary incentives for employing long-term family assistance recipients".

**1997**—Pub. L. 105–34, title VIII, §801(b), Aug. 5, 1997, 111 Stat. 871, added item 51A.

**1996**—Pub. L. 104–188, title I, §1201(e)(2), Aug. 20, 1996, 110 Stat. 1772, substituted "Work Opportunity Credit" for "Targeted Jobs Credit" in subpart heading.

**1984**—Pub. L. 98–369, div. A, title IV, §474(n)(1), (2), (p)(9), July 18, 1984, 98 Stat. 833, 838, substituted "F" for "D" as subpart designation, substituted "Rules for Computing Targeted Jobs Credit" for "Rules for Computing Credit for Employment of Certain New Employees" in heading, and struck out item 53 "Limitation based on amount of tax".