alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2851 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2851

To extend the suspension of duty on 3-Dodecyl-1-(2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-4-
                   piperidinyl)-2,5-pyrrolidinedione.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 9, 2005

 Mrs. Myrick introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To extend the suspension of duty on 3-Dodecyl-1-(2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-4-
                   piperidinyl)-2,5-pyrrolidinedione.

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

SECTION 1. 3-DODECYL-1-(2,2,6,6-TETRAMETHYL-4-PIPERIDINYL)-2,5-
              PYRROLIDINEDIONE.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.04.12 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to 3-Dodecyl-1-(2,2,6,6-
tetramethyl-4-piperidinyl)-2,5-pyrrolidinedione) is amended by striking 
``12/31/2006'' and inserting ``12/31/2008''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### § 206.137 Effect of noncompliance with regulations.

If, for any reason, the mortgagee fails to comply with the regulations in this subpart, the Commissioner may hold processing of the application for insurance benefits in abeyance for a reasonable time in order to permit the mortgagee to comply. In the alternative to holding processing in abeyance, the Commissioner may reconvey title to the property or reassign the mortgage to the mortgagee, in which event the application for insurance benefits shall be considered as cancelled and the mortgagee shall refund the insurance benefits to the Commissioner as well as other funds required by § 206.138. The mortgagee may reapply for insurance benefits at a subsequent date; provided, however, that the mortgagee may not be reimbursed for any expenses incurred in connection with the property after it has been reconveyed or the mortgage reassigned by the Commissioner, or paid any debenture interest accrued after the date of initial conveyance, whichever is earlier, and there will be deducted from the insurance benefits any reduction in the Commissioner's estimate of the value of the property occurring from the time of reconveyance or mortgage reassignment to the time of reapplication.
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT UNITED STATES OF AM ER IC A,

Pla i ntiff-Appe lle e , v. GUILLER

M O ALEGR

E R AM IREZ, De fe nda nt-Appe l la

nt. No. 15-50254

D.C . No. 3:14-c r-03431-LAB M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Southe rn Distric t of C a lifornia Larry A. B urns, Distric t Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d Ja

nua ry 18, 2017 ** B e fore : TR OTT, TASHIM A, a nd C ALLAHAN, C irc uit Judge s. Guille rm o Ale g re R am i re z a p pe a ls from the distric t

c o urt’ s judgm e nt a

nd c ha lle nge s the 50-m onth se nte n c e im pose d following his guilty -ple a c onvic tion for im porta tion of c oc a ine , in viola

tion of 21 U.S.C . §§ 952 a nd 960. W e have jurisdic tion unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1291, a nd we va c ate and re m and for re se nte nc ing.



# FIL ED JAN 23 2017 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3.

* * The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se eFe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).R am ire z argue s tha t the distric t c ourt e rre d in de ny ing a m inor role re duc tion to his ba se le ve l offe n s e unde r U.S.S.G. § 3B 1.2(b). Afte r R am ire z wa s se nte nc e d, the U nite d State s Se nte nc ing C om m ission issue d

Am e ndm e nt 794 (“ the Am e ndm e nt” ), whic h am e nde d the c om m e nta ry to the m i nor role Guide line . The Am e ndm e nt is re troa c tive to c a se s pe nding on dire c t a ppe a l. Se e Unite d

State s v . Quinte ro-Le

y v a , 823 F.3d 519, 523 (9th C ir. 2016). The Am e ndm e nt c la

rifie d tha t, in a sse s sing whe the r a

de fe nda nt should re c e ive a m inor role a djustm e nt, the c ourt should c om pa re him to the othe r pa rtic i pa nts in the c rim e , rathe r tha n to a hy pothe tic a l a

ve ra ge pa rtic ipa nt. Se e U.S.S.G. App. C Am e nd. 794; Q uinte ro-Le y v a , 823 F.3d a

t 523. In a ddition, the Am e ndm e nt c la

rifie d tha t “ [t] he fa c t tha

t a de fe nda nt pe rform s a

n e sse ntia l or indispe nsa

ble role in the c rim ina l a c tivity is not de te rm inative .” U.S.S.G. § 3B 1.2 c m t. n.3(C ) (2015). Fina lly , the Am e ndm e nt a dde d a non-e xha ustive list of fa c tors that a c ourt “ should c onside r” in de te rm ining whe the r to a pply a m inor role re duc t ion. Se eid. B e c a

use we c annot de te rm ine from the re c ord whe the r the distric t c o urt followe d

the guida nc e of the Am e ndm e nt’ s c la rify ing la n gua g e and c onside re d a ll of thenow-re le va nt fa c tors, we va c ate R am ire z ’ s se nte nc e and re m and for re se nte nc i ng unde r the Am e ndm e nt. Se eQuinte ro-Le y v a , 823 F.3d a

t 523-24.

1 5 - 5 0 2 5 4 2In light of this disposition, we do not re a c h R am ire z ’ s c onte ntion tha t his se nte nc e is substa

ntive ly unre a sona

ble . V ACAT E D and RE M ANDE D for r e se nte nc i ng.

1 5 - 5 0 2 5 4 3
#### Eugene J. O’Brien, Respondent, v Elaine D. O’Brien, Appellant.

In an action, *inter alia,*to declare a separation agreement null and void by reason of a change of circumstances, defendant appeals from stated portions of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered April 22, 1977, which, *inter alia,*adjudged that she is not entitled to the benefit of support provisions contained in a separation agreement. Judgment reversed, without costs or disbursements, and action remanded to Special Term for a new trial of the issues, including the question whether there was any breach of the separation agreement. Pending the retrial, defendant is directed to pay the plaintiff $200 per month as provided for in the judgment appealed from. On the argument of this appeal, it was represented to the court that the house referred to in the separation agreement has recently been sold and that surplus moneys remain. We therefore believe that the interests of justice require a new trial. Hopkins, J. P., Martuscello, Latham and O’Connor, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit
      32.2**





**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**


**PURSUANT
      TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**




In
      connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Blackhawk Capital Group BDC,
      Inc. (the "Company") for the year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Craig
      A.
      Zabala, as acting Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereto certifies,
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:




1.  The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities 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.




Date:  March
      28,
      2008





/s/
      Craig
      A. Zabala





Craig
      A.
      Zabala


Acting
      Chief Financial Officer


(Principal
      Financial Officer)





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
      authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
      in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
      by Section 906, has been provided to Blackhawk Capital Group BDC and furnished
      to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
§ 3285.304 Pier configuration. ( a ) *Concrete blocks.* Installation instructions for concrete block piers must be developed in accordance with the following provisions and must be consistent with Figures A and B to § 3285.306. ( 1 ) Load-bearing (not decorative) concrete blocks must have nominal dimensions of at least 8 inches × 8 inches × 16 inches;
( 2 ) The concrete blocks must be stacked with their hollow cells aligned vertically; and
( 3 ) When piers are constructed of blocks stacked side-by-side, each layer must be at right angles to the preceding one, as shown in Figure B to § 3285.306.
( b ) *Caps.* ( 1 ) Structural loads must be evenly distributed across capped-hollow block piers, as shown in Figures A and B to § 3285.306.
( 2 ) Caps must be solid concrete or masonry at least 4 inches in nominal thickness, or hardboard lumber at least 2 inches nominal in thickness; or be corrosion-protected minimum one-half inch thick steel; or be of other listed materials.
( 3 ) All caps must be of the same length and width as the piers on which they rest.
( 4 ) When split caps are used on double-stacked blocks, the caps must be installed with the long dimension across the joint in the blocks below.
( c ) *Gaps.* Any gaps that occur during installation between the bottom of the main chassis beam and foundation support system must be filled by: ( 1 ) Nominal 4 inch × 6 inch × 1 inch shims to level the home and fill any gaps between the base of the main chassis beam and the top of the pier cap;
( 2 ) Shims must be used in pairs, as shown in Figures A and B to § 3285.306, and must be driven in tightly so that they do not occupy more than one inch of vertical height; and
( 3 ) Hardwood plates no thicker than 2 inches nominal in thickness or 2 inch or 4 inch nominal concrete block must be used to fill in any remaining vertical gaps.
( d ) *Manufactured pier heights.* Manufactured pier heights must be selected so that the adjustable risers do not extend more than 2 inches when finally positioned.
### SUBCHAPTER II—CONRAIL
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Richard Conklin, Appellant.

[834 NYS2d 384]—

*1023Peters, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Ulster County (Bruhn, J.), rendered March 20, 2006, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of burglary in the first degree.

Defendant and two codefendants were charged in an indictment with burglary in the first degree, robbery in the first degree and assault in the second degree. The charges arose from an incident during which defendant and his codefendants unlawfully entered the home of defendant’s former employer, who was approximately 80 years old, and then assaulted and robbed her. Following guilty pleas by his codefendants, who admitted to holding down and kicking the victim but otherwise stated that defendant, though present, was not involved in her physical assault, defendant pleaded guilty to burglary in the first degree in full satisfaction of the indictment. Pursuant to the negotiated plea agreement, County Court sentenced defendant to 121/2 years in prison followed by a five-year period of postrelease supervision. He now appeals, asserting that County Court abused its discretion in denying his request for a “voice line-up” and that his sentence was harsh and excessive.

According to defendant, the only evidence connecting him to the crime was the victim’s statement to the police wherein she identified defendant, who had covered his face with his shirt throughout their encounter, by his voice. Inasmuch as a review of the record reveals otherwise, we disagree and affirm. Defendant’s contention that his sentence is harsh and excessive is similarly unpersuasive. In addition to minimizing the severity of his extensive criminal history, defendant has exhibited no remorse or accepted any responsibility for his participation in a crime that resulted in the hospitalization of an elderly woman who had endeavored to help him in the past. Defendant has failed to demonstrate that extraordinary circumstances exist or that County Court abused its discretion in imposing the agreed-upon sentence and, thus, we decline to disturb it *(see People v Sieber,*26 AD3d 535, 536 [2006]).

Mercure, J.P, Spain, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Exhibit 11

                     METRIS COMPANIES INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                        Computation of Earnings Per Share

<TABLE>
In thousands, except per share amounts            Three Months Ended September 30,      Nine Months Ended September 30,
                                                        1999         1998                     1999          1998
BASIC:
<S>                                                  <C>          <C>                      <C>           <C>
Net income (loss) applicable to common
     stockholders ...............................     $ 24,001     $ 16,996                 $(88,253)     $ 40,620
                                                      ========     ========                 ========      ========

Weighted average number of common shares
     outstanding ................................       38,585       38,461                   38,561        38,454

Net income (loss) per share .....................     $    .62     $    .44                 $  (2.29)     $   1.06

DILUTED:

Net income (loss) applicable to common
     stockholders (1) ...........................     $ 24,001     $ 16,996                 $(88,253)     $ 40,620
                                                      ========     ========                 ========      ========

Weighted average number of common shares
     outstanding ................................       38,585       38,461                   38,561        38,454

Net effect of assumed  exercise of stock options
     based on treasury stock method using average
     market price (2) ...........................        2,366        1,665                     --           1,493
Assumed conversion of convertible preferred
     stock (2) ..................................       17,126         --                       --            --
                                                      --------     --------                 --------      --------
                                                        58,077       40,126                   38,561        39,947
                                                      ========     ========                 ========      ========

Net income (loss) per share .....................     $    .54     $    .42                 $  (2.29)     $   1.02
</TABLE>


(1)  For the three month period ended September 30, 1999,  diluted  earnings per
     share is  calculated  by adding  back the  Series C  convertible  preferred
     dividend of $7.2  million.  In  determining  the number of dilutive  shares
     outstanding,  the Series C convertible  preferred  stock is assumed to have
     been  converted into 17.1 million shares at the beginning of the period and
     therefore,  no  dividend  would be paid for the three  month  period  ended
     September 30, 1999.

(2)  For the nine month period  ended  September  30,  1999,  there were options
     and convertible  preferred stock outstanding to purchase 1.9 million and
     7.8 million common shares. These potential common shares have been excluded
     from the computation of diluted earnings per share because their inclusion
     would have been anti-dilutive.
### §438. Repealed. Aug. 13, 1953, ch. 428, §10, 67 Stat. 568

Section, acts Feb. 14, 1920, ch. 76, 41 Stat. 434; Jan. 21, 1922, ch. 32, §1, 42 Stat. 358; Dec. 5, 1924, ch. 4, §4(m), 43 Stat. 703, related to exchange of farm unit. See sections 451 to 451k of this title.
Exhibit 11
                                     
                  Metris Companies Inc. and Subsidiaries
                     Computation of Earnings Per Share
              (in thousands, except share and per share data)
<TABLE>
                               Three Months Ended       Nine Months Ended
                                   September 30,            September 30,
                                 1998        1997         1998         1997
 Basic:
 Net income available to                                      
   <S>                       <C> <C>     <C> <C>      <C> <C>      <C> <C>
   common stockholders       $   16,996  $   10,537   $   40,620   $   27,994
 
Weighted average number of                
  common shares outstanding      19,231      19,225       19,227       19,225
                             
Net income per share        $       .88  $      .55  $      2.11   $     1.46
                                                                    
Diluted:
Net income available to 
  common stockholders       $    16,996  $    10,537 $    40,620   $   27,994
                                                                    
Weighted average number of                       
  common shares outstanding      19,231       19,225      19,227       19,225
                             
Net effect of assumed exercise                             
  of stock options based on                                                                    
  treasury stock method using
  average market price              832        1,074         746          999
                                 20,063       20,299      19,973       20,224
                                                                    
Net income per share        $       .85  $       .52 $      2.03   $     1.38
</TABLE>
#### § 330.35 Investors.

Association guaranteed multiclass securities may not be suitable investments for all investors. No investor should purchase securities of any class unless the investor understands, and is able to bear, the prepayment, yield, liquidity and market risks associated with the class. The Association assumes no obligation or liability to any person with regard to determining the suitability of such securities for such investor.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of A Clean Slate, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarter ended June 30, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned Robert S. Goldman, Chief Executive Officer, Treasurer, Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer of A Clean Slate,        Inc., certify, pursuant to 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 the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

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

| Dated: August 19, 2011 |   | /s/ Robert S. Goldman                                   |   |
|------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                   |   | Robert S. Goldman                                            |   |
|                   |   | Chief Executive Officer, Treasurer, Principal Financial |   |
|                   |   | Officer and Principal Accounting Officer                |   |
### Archive of digital boomer and CHIRP seismic reflection data collected during USGS cruise 06FSH03 offshore of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, September 2006

By: Arnell S. Harrison**Shawn V. DadismanChristopher D. Reich**Dana S. WieseJason W. GreenwoodPeter W. Swarzenski**

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/ds308

#### Links

- More information:  **USGS Index Page**                            (html)
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

In September of 2006, the U.S. Geological Survey conducted geophysical surveys offshore of Fort Lauderdale, FL. This report serves as an archive of unprocessed digital boomer and CHIRP seismic reflection data, trackline maps, navigation files, GIS information, Field Activity Collection System (FACS) logs, observer's logbook, and formal FGDC metadata. Filtered and gained digital images of the seismic profiles are also provided.

The archived trace data are in standard Society of Exploration Geophysicists (SEG) SEG-Y format (Barry and others, 1975) and may be downloaded and processed with commercial or public domain software such as Seismic Unix (SU). Example SU processing scripts and USGS software for viewing the SEG-Y files (Zihlman, 1992) are also provided.

#### Study Area
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                            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 Quarterly Report of JCC Holding Company (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, L.
Camille Fowler, Vice President - Finance, Treasurer and Secretary of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge that:

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

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


Date: August 13, 2002                  /s/ L. Camille Fowler
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       L. Camille Fowler
                                       Vice President - Finance,
                                       Treasurer and Secretary
7/28/15

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Edward M. Chen

Case 3:09-cv-02161-EMC Document 161 Filed 07/28/15 Page 1 of 3
Case 3:09-cv-02161-EMC Document 161 Filed 07/28/15 Page 2 of 3
Case 3:09-cv-02161-EMC Document 161 Filed 07/28/15 Page 3 of 3