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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM 1ST QUARTER
10Q OF ARGOSY GAMING COMPANY AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                           50830
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     2827
<ALLOWANCES>                                      1485
<INVENTORY>                                        987
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 64171
<PP&E>                                          377787
<DEPRECIATION>                                   54444
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  541875
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            65612
<BONDS>                                         350000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           243
<OTHER-SE>                                       63441
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    541875
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 82495
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    80534
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               11902
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (8499)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (9017)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (9017)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.37)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.37)
        

</TABLE>
### [§902. Repealed. Pub. L. 115–97, title I, §14301(a), Dec. 22, 2017, 131 Stat. 2221]

Section, act Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 286; Pub. L. 86–780, §6(b)(2), Sept. 14, 1960, 74 Stat. 1016; Pub. L. 87–834, §9(a), Oct. 16, 1962, 76 Stat. 999; Pub. L. 91–684, §§1, 2, Jan. 12, 1971, 84 Stat. 2068, 2069; Pub. L. 94–12, title VI, §602(c)(6), Mar. 29, 1975, 89 Stat. 59; Pub. L. 94–455, title X, §1033(a), Oct. 4, 1976, 90 Stat. 1626; Pub. L. 99–514, title XII, §1202(a), Oct. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 2528; Pub. L. 100–647, title I, §1012(b)(1), (2), Nov. 10, 1988, 102 Stat. 3496; Pub. L. 105–34, title XI, §§1113(a), 1163(a), Aug. 5, 1997, 111 Stat. 970, 987; Pub. L. 108–357, title IV, §405(a), Oct. 22, 2004, 118 Stat. 1498, related to deemed paid credit where domestic corporation owns 10 percent or more of voting stock of foreign corporation.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal applicable to taxable years of foreign corporations beginning after Dec. 31, 2017, and to taxable years of United States shareholders in which or with which such taxable years of foreign corporations end, see section 14301(d) of Pub. L. 115–97, set out as an Effective Date of 2017 Amendment note under section 78 of this title.
### SUBCHAPTER I—GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LEAVE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

CASE NO. 20-60804-CIV-ALTMAN 

KATHLEEN HARWOOD, 

 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

NATIONWIDE CREDIT, INC., and 

TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP., 

 Defendants. 

_________________________/ 

ORDER SCHEDULING STATUS CONFERENCE 

 Counsel in the following cases are directed to appear at a status conference, in 

accordance with this Order, on July 7, 2020, at 1:00 p.m. The conference will be conducted 

telephonically. At that time, the parties shall dial 1-888-363-4734 and enter access code 

9127026, followed by the # symbol. Counsel must not utilize speakerphone functionality during 

the hearing. If possible, counsel should use a landline. Instructions for the status conference are 

as follows: 

1. The parties are not personally required to appear, but a representative of each 

party with full authority to enter a full and complete compromise must appear. 

2. As cases are called, the attorneys will be directed to confer on a possible 

resolution of the case. The Court will not oversee these discussions. 

3. If an agreement is reached, the parties shall promptly notify the Court. 

4. The Plaintiff’s counsel must appear with the entire case file. If any of the 

Defendants have not yet appeared, the Plaintiff must serve a copy of this Order on 

any such Defendant within two (2) business days of the date of this Order. 

Case 0:20-cv-61087-RKA Document 9 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/01/2020 Page 1 of 2
2 

5. The Defendant must appear with all evidence it has in support of its defenses. 

6. The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter this Order in the following cases: 

a. 20-cv-60595 – Torres v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc., et al. 

 (call in: 1:10 p.m.)

b. 20-cv-61065 – Jaimes v. Jaba Pro Stone Corp.

 (call in: 1:20 p.m.)

c. 20-cv-81004 – Fernandez v. Applebee’s Restaurants, LLC

 (call in: 1:30 p.m.)

d. 20-61024 – Adams v. Therapies 4 Kids, Inc., et al. 

 (call in: 1:40 p.m.)

e. 20-cv-61087 – Concepcion v. Frost-Arnett Company 

 (call in: 1:50 p.m.)

 DONE AND ORDERED in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 30th day of June 2020. 

 

 _________________________________ 

 ROY K. ALTMAN 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

cc: counsel of record 

Case 0:20-cv-61087-RKA Document 9 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/01/2020 Page 2 of 2
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION

Case No.: 20-61346-CIV-SMITH

DELROY A. CHAMBERS, JR., 

 

 Plaintiff, 

 

v. 

STONEWALL GLOBAL REALTY, LLC, 

Defendant. 

____________________________________________/

JOINT STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Plaintiff and Defendant, by and through their undersigned counsel and pursuant to 

Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), hereby file this Joint Stipulation of Dismissal without Prejudice. 

The Parties further confirm to the Court that, by agreement of the parties, each party will bear 

their own respective attorneys’ fees and costs.

Respectfully submitted,

Joshua A. Glickman, Esq.

Florida Bar No. 43994

josh@sjlawcollective.com

Shawn A. Heller, Esq.

Florida Bar No. 46346

shawn@sjlawcollective.com

Social Justice Law Collective, PL

974 Howard Avenue

Dunedin, Florida 34698

(202) 709-5744

(866) 893-0416 (Fax)

Attorneys for the Plaintiff

By: s/ Joshua A. Glickman .

Joshua A. Glickman, Esq.

Case 0:20-cv-61346-RS Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/11/2021 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Kelly B. Holbrook, Esq.

Florida Bar No. 527084

kholbrook@constangy.com

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

100 North Tampa Street

Suite 3350

Tampa, FL 33602-5832

Attorneys for the Defendant

By: s/ Kelly B. Holbrook .

Kelly B. Holbrook, Esq.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the 

Court using the CM/ECF system, on this 11th day of January, 2021, which will send a notice of 

electronic filing to all attorneys of record.

By: s/ Joshua A. Glickman .

Joshua A. Glickman, Esq.

Case 0:20-cv-61346-RS Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/11/2021 Page 2 of 2
#### § 113.440 Health and insurance benefits and services.

Subject to § 113.235(d), in providing a medical, hospital, accident, or life insurance benefit, service, policy, or plan to any of its students, a recipient shall not discriminate on the basis of sex, or provide such benefit, service, policy, or plan in a manner that would violate §§ 113.500 through 113.550 if it were provided to employees of the recipient. This section shall not prohibit a recipient from providing any benefit or service that may be used by a different proportion of students of one sex than of the other, including family planning services. However, any recipient that provides full coverage health service shall provide gynecological care.
Editorial Note on Part 134
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 134 appear at 72 FR 50042, Aug. 30, 2007.

§ 134.808 The decision. ( a ) The Judge will decide the appeal within 45 calendar days (if practicable) from close of record. The decision will affirm, modify, remand, or reverse the Step One or Step Two decision.
( b ) The standard of review and burden of proof will be determined by the specific issue presented.
( c ) OHA's decision is an initial decision which becomes the final decision of the SBA 30 calendar days after issuance, unless a party files a request for review pursuant to § 134.809.
( d ) OHA's decision is not precedential and it will not be published.
[75 FR 47443, Aug. 6, 2010, as amended at 82 FR 25507, June 2, 2017]
### §539. Counterintelligence official reception and representation expenses

The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation may use funds available to the Federal Bureau of Investigation for counterintelligence programs to pay the expenses of hosting foreign officials in the United States under the auspices of the Federal Bureau of Investigation for consultation on counterintelligence matters.

(Added Pub. L. 99–569, title IV, §401(a), Oct. 27, 1986, 100 Stat. 3195.)
### §1300j–2. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 103–323, §3, Sept. 21, 1994, 108 Stat. 2153, which provided for the band and its members to be eligible for all Federal services and benefits furnished to federally recognized Indian tribes, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
----

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on medicinal products for paediatric use and amending Regulation (EEC) No 1768/92, Directive 2001/83/EC and Regulation (EC) No 726/2004

(COM(2004) 599 final — 2004/0217 COD)

(2005/C 267/01)

On 12 November 2004 the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 251 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the abovementioned proposal.

The Section for the Single Market, Production and Consumption, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 20 April 2005. The rapporteur was Mr Braghin.

At its 417th plenary session (meeting of 11/12 May 2005), the European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion unanimously.

1.   Summary of the Committee's recommendations

2.   Introduction

3.   General comments

3.1   Safeguarding paediatric health and clinical trials in children

3.2   Basic information gaps affecting the use of medicines

3.3   The paediatric committee and clinical trials

3.4   Incentive measures

3.5   Information on the use of medicines for children

4.   Concluding comments

Brussels, 11 May 2005

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

----

(1)  European Clinical Trials Database

(2)OJ L 121, 1.5.2001

(3)  In the USA, the FDA may require trials for paediatric use in cases where the inadequate labelling of a medicine on the market could expose patients to significant risk.

(4)  In the USA, the FDA defines ‘substantial’ as at least 50,000 patients. At this level, a company may be required to conduct clinical paediatric trials.

(5)OJ L 121 of 1 May 2001

(6)  With particular reference to guideline ICH E 11, which states: ‘The ethical imperative to obtain knowledge of the effects of the medicinal products in paediatric patients has to be balanced against the ethical imperative to protect each paediatric patient in clinical trials’.

(7)  See the explanatory memorandum under Information on the use of medicines for children, p. 7

(8)Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act, 1 April 2002, Public Law n. 107-109.

(9)  A simplified mechanism of this type has already been adopted in the United States, where 33 products now include paediatric information in their leaflet as a result of post-registration clinical studies (since periodic safety update reports do not exist in the United States such studies were required), whereas 53 are authorised for exclusive paediatric use on the basis of a complete clinical study plan.

----
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 99.1


                          [BANK OF NEW YORK LETTERHEAD]

                                BANK OF NEW YORK

                              Officer's Certificate

                          -----------------------------
                                February 21, 2006



MERRILL LYNCH DEPOSITOR, INC.
North Tower, 7th Floor
4 World Financial Center
New York, New York 10080

              PREFERREDPLUS, PPLUS TRUST AND INDEXPLUS CERTIFICATE

The undersigned, Thomas J. Bogert, the Vice President-Manager of The Bank of New
York, a New York corporation (the "Trustee"), hereby certifies in such capacity
that, based on his knowledge, the Trustee has complied, in all material
respects, with all conditions and covenants applicable to the Trustee under the
Standard Terms for Trust Agreements dated February 20, 1998 between Merrill
Lynch Depositor, Inc. as depositor (the "Depositor") and the Trustee, as
successor to United States Trust Company of New York, as trustee and securities
intermediary (the "Securities Intermediary"), in each case as amended by a
series supplement between the Depositor, the Trustee and the Securities
Intermediary for each series of trust certificates listed in the attached
schedule.




                                    Very truly yours,

                                    BANK OF NEW YORK


                                    By: /s/ Thomas J. Bogert
                                        ------------------------
                                    Name:  Thomas J. Bogert
                                    Title: Vice President


<PAGE>

                                   SCHEDULE

Public STEERS(R) Series 1998 HLT-1 Trust
Public STEERS(R) Series 1998 TRV-C1 Trust
Public STEERS(R) Series 1999 REN-C1 Trust
PreferredPLUS Trust Series CCR-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series BLS-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series ATT-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series NAI-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series FRD-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series BLC-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series LMG-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series CZN-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series QWS-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series CTR-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series LMG-2
PreferredPLUS Trust Series QWS-2
PreferredPLUS Trust Series ALL-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series BLC-2
PreferredPLUS Trust Series ELP-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series MSD-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series VER-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series UPC-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series FAR-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series GEC-1
PreferredPLUS Trust Series GRC-1
PPLUS Trust Series PMC-1
PPLUS Trust Series VAL-1
PPLUS Trust Series GSG-1
PPLUS Trust Series FMC-1
PPLUS Trust Series GSG-2
PPLUS Trust Series DCC-1
PPLUS Trust Series CSF-1
PPLUS Trust Series SPR-1
PPLUS Trust Series TWC-1
PPLUS Trust Series CMT-1
PPLUS Trust Series GSC-1
PPLUS Trust Series DCNA-1
PPLUS Trust Series GSC-2
PPLUS Trust Series JPM-1
PPLUS Trust Series LMG-3
INDEXPLUS Trust 2003-1

                                       2
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Giovanni Bertuglia, Appellant.

The parties hereto having stipulated in open court that this case may be disposed of by a court of four, the decision is as follows: Judgment of conviction of the County Court of Queens county reversed on the ground that the verdict is clearly against the weight of evidence, and defendant discharged. Jenks, P. J., Stapleton, Rich and Putnam, JJ., concurred.
No: 23-010 February 16, 2023 

CONTACT: David McIntyre, 301-415-8200 

NRC Approves Proposed Disposal Plan at Church Rock Site in New Mexico

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved a plan by United Nuclear Corp. to 

dispose of mine waste from the Northeast Church Rock mine site in New Mexico at the 

company’s nearby existing uranium mill tailings site. 

In a license amendment issued Feb. 15, the NRC authorized the company’s plan to 

dispose of approximately 1 million cubic yards of waste from the mine at the tailings site in 

McKinley County, New Mexico, northeast of Gallup. The proposal is part of a longstanding U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency effort to clean up the Northeast Church Rock mine site, which 

was contaminated during mining operations from 1967 to 1982. The project includes 

improvements to the existing tailings impoundment and nearby infrastructure. 

The NRC’s consideration of the license amendment request included an environmental 

review and a safety review. A final Environmental Impact Statement, published in January, 

assessed the potential impacts of excavating the waste and transferring it to the mill site for 

disposal. The safety review covered the disposal aspect of the plan, as the mill tailings facility is 

licensed by the NRC. The NRC’s regulatory jurisdiction does not extend to the mine itself. The 

staff’s final Safety Evaluation Report was issued in December. 

More information on the Church Rock site is available on the NRC website.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-6219

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

DAYMIONE DESOUZA, a/k/a Fata, a/k/a Demione

DeSouza,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District

Judge. (CR-93-53-H, CA-96-162-4-H)

Submitted: May 19, 1998 Decided: October 22, 1998

Before NIEMEYER, HAMILTON, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Daymione DeSouza, Appellant Pro Se. Bruce Charles Johnson, OFFICE

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Daymione DeSouza appeals the district court’s order denying

relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1998). DeSouza challenges the validity of his conviction,

entered pursuant to his guilty plea, of using and carrying a

firearm in relation to a drug trafficking crime in violation of 18

U.S.C. §§ 2, 924(c) (1994). DeSouza contends that in light of the

Supreme Court’s decision in Bailey v. United States, 516 U.S. 137

(1995), interpreting the meaning of “use” under § 924(c), the

requisite factual basis for his plea was lacking and his plea was

involuntary.

We reject DeSouza’s contention that the record demonstrates

that he did not “use” or “carry” a firearm within the meaning of

§ 924(c)(1) as that statute was interpreted by Bailey. DeSouza is

liable for the acts of his co-conspirators which constitute use or

carry under § 924(c). See United States v. Wilson, 135 F.3d 291,

305-06 (4th Cir. 1998); United States v. Phan, 121 F.3d 149, 152

n.2 (4th Cir. 1997), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 66 U.S.L.W. 3388

(U.S. Feb. 23, 1998) (No. 97-863). Accordingly, we deny DeSouza’s

motion for 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
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 v. 

RAFAEL PAHUA-MARTINEZ, 

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 22-10169 

D.C. No. 

2:15-cr-00140-TLN-EFB-1 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Troy L. Nunley, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 18, 2023

**

Before: GRABER, PAEZ, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

Rafael Pahua-Martinez appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying 

his motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). We 

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Reviewing for abuse of discretion, see

United States v. Keller, 2 F.4th 1278, 1281 (9th Cir. 2021), we affirm. 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

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

FILED

JAN 25 2023

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 22-10169 

The district court denied Pahua-Martinez’s motion because the 18 U.S.C. 

§ 3553(a) factors did not support the “drastic reduction” that Pahua-Martinez was 

seeking in requesting a time-served sentence. Pahua-Martinez now contends that 

the district court abused its discretion by limiting its consideration to whether he 

was entitled to a reduction to a time-served sentence and failing to consider a 

“lesser form of relief.” As Pahua-Martinez concedes, however, he only requested a 

time-served sentence and did not seek a partial sentence reduction before the 

district court. The district court did not abuse its discretion by failing to consider 

relief that Pahua-Martinez did not request. Moreover, the district court reasonably 

concluded that release was unwarranted in light of the nature and circumstances of 

Pahua-Martinez’s offense and his criminal history. See Keller, 2 F.4th at 1284.

Because we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in its 

§ 3553(a) analysis, we need not reach Pahua-Martinez’s argument that the court 

erred when determining that he had not shown extraordinary and compelling 

reasons for release. See United States v. Wright, 46 F.4th 938, 947-48 (9th Cir. 

2022) (any error by the district court in assessing whether defendant has 

extraordinary and compelling reasons “is harmless if the court properly relied on 

the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors as an alternative basis for its holding”). 

AFFIRMED.
HomeAbout NRCHow We RegulateGeneric Issues

# How to Propose a New Generic Issue

Persons who wish to report emergencies or who wish to report violations should follow the procedures listed under Report a Safety or Security Concern. Persons who wish to submit a proposed GI (What is a Generic Issue?) should complete the Form to Propose a Generic Issue (GI). For electronic submittal, follow the instructions on the online form. Alternately, you can send the completed NRC Form 833 by US Mail to US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Generic Issues Program, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Mail Stop C-2C07M.

Contact a GIP representative if you have any questions.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, July 7, 2020

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - Policy and Procedures Documents
          - Frequently Asked Questions
          - How to Propose a New Generic Issue

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

                - The Commission
                - License Renewal Generic Environmental Review
                - Job Openings
                - Palisades Restart
                - Environmental Justice 
                - Pilgrim Water Releases
                - Monticello Tritium Issue
                - International Strategy 2021-2025
                - Tribal Liaison Program
                - MAP-X
                - Transformation at the NRC - Updated
                - OIG Hotline
                - Rulemaking Activity
                - Commission Documents
                - Advanced Reactors
                - Nuclear Security
                - Strategic Plan

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, July 7, 2020