alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA DIVISION

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO.5:96CR2-SPM/AK

EDWARD EARL FLOYD,

Defendant.

 /

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This cause is before the Court on Defendant’s motion to vacate and to remand

for resentencing. Doc. 186. Defendant pled guilty to Count One, conspiracy to

distribute a controlled substance and Count Two, forfeiture, on or about June 21, 1996.

He was sentenced on October 21, 1996, to a term of 240-months imprisonment. Docs.

83 & 84. He did not appeal the sentence. He later filed a § 2255 motion to vacate,

which was denied on May 13, 1998. Docs. 136 & 137. 

On this occasion, Defendant maintains that he has been subjected to an

unconstitutionally enhanced sentence under the Sentencing Guidelines in contravention

of Booker. Doc. 186.

Case 5:96-cr-00002-SPM-AK Document 187 Filed 05/04/05 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No.5:96cr2-spm/ak

Following its decision in Blakely v. Washington, which involved the

constitutionality of state sentencing guidelines, the United States Supreme Court

determined that Blakely applies to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines as well. United

States v. Booker, ____ U.S. ____, 124 S.Ct. 2519, 159 L.Ed. 2d 442 (2004). However,

the Eleventh Circuit has recently determined that Booker is not retroactively applicable

to cases on collateral review, as “Booker’s constitutional rule falls squarely under the

category of new rules of criminal procedure that do not apply retroactively to § 2255

cases on collateral review.” Varela v. United States, 400 F.3d 864, 868 (11th Cir. 2005).

In light of the foregoing, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED:

That Defendant’s motion to vacate and to remand for resentencing, Doc. 186, be

DENIED.

IN CHAMBERS at Gainesville, Florida, this 4th day of May, 2005.

s/ A. KORNBLUM 

ALLAN KORNBLUM

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and

recommendations within 15 days after being served with a copy of this report and

recommendation. A party may respond to another party’s objections within 10 days after

being served with a copy thereof. Failure to file specific objections limits the scope of

review of proposed factual findings and recommendations.

Case 5:96-cr-00002-SPM-AK Document 187 Filed 05/04/05 Page 2 of 2
# L_2021336EN.01004701.xml

| 23.9.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 336/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.9.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 336/47

---

Corrigendum to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/1255 of 21 April 2021 amending Delegated Regulation (EU) No 231/2013 as regards the sustainability risks and sustainability factors to be taken into account by Alternative Investment Fund Managers

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 277 of 2 August 2021
  )

On page 12, in Article 1(2), in the amendment to Article 18 of Delegated Regulation (EU) No 231/2013:

for:

| ‘(2) | in Article 18, the following paragraphs 5 and 6 are added:

  “5.   AIFMs shall take into account sustainability risks when complying with the requirements set out in paragraphs 1 to 3.


  6.   Where AIFMs consider principal adverse impacts of investment decisions on sustainability factors as described in Article 4(1), point (a) of Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2019/2088, or as required by paragraphs 3 or 4 of Article 4 of that Regulation, those AIFMs shall take into account such principal adverse impacts when complying with the requirements set out in paragraphs 1 to 3 of this Article.”;’, |
| --- | --- |

‘(2)

in Article 18, the following paragraphs 5 and 6 are added:

“5.   AIFMs shall take into account sustainability risks when complying with the requirements set out in paragraphs 1 to 3.

6.   Where AIFMs consider principal adverse impacts of investment decisions on sustainability factors as described in Article 4(1), point (a) of Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2019/2088, or as required by paragraphs 3 or 4 of Article 4 of that Regulation, those AIFMs shall take into account such principal adverse impacts when complying with the requirements set out in paragraphs 1 to 3 of this Article.”;’,

read:

| ‘(2) | in Article 18, the following paragraphs 5 and 6 are added:

  “5.   AIFMs shall take into account sustainability risks when complying with the requirements set out in paragraphs 1 to 3.


  6.   Where AIFMs consider principal adverse impacts of investment decisions on sustainability factors as described in Article 4(1), point (a) of Regulation (EU) 2019/2088, or as required by paragraphs 3 or 4 of Article 4 of that Regulation, those AIFMs shall take into account such principal adverse impacts when complying with the requirements set out in paragraphs 1 to 3 of this Article.”;’. |
| --- | --- |

‘(2)

in Article 18, the following paragraphs 5 and 6 are added:

“5.   AIFMs shall take into account sustainability risks when complying with the requirements set out in paragraphs 1 to 3.

6.   Where AIFMs consider principal adverse impacts of investment decisions on sustainability factors as described in Article 4(1), point (a) of Regulation (EU) 2019/2088, or as required by paragraphs 3 or 4 of Article 4 of that Regulation, those AIFMs shall take into account such principal adverse impacts when complying with the requirements set out in paragraphs 1 to 3 of this Article.”;’.

---
#### STORM et al., Appellants, v. McGROVER et al., Respondents.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

July 12, 1906.)

Action by Theresa Storm and others against Sophie McGrover and others. H Cohn, for appellants. B.. H. Barnett, for respondents.

No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs. Order filed.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<LEGEND>
                                                  EXHIBIT 27.1

                          FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE
                    COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL COMPANIES
                        ARTICLE 5 OF REGULATION S-X

          This schedule contains summary financial information extracted
from the Consolidated Statements of Operations and Consolidated Balance
Sheets of King World Productions, Inc. and its Subsidiaries and is quali-
fied in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.

       
<S>                                 <C>
<MULTIPLIER>                        1,000
<CURRENCY>                          U.S. DOLLARS
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       1st QUARTER
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   AUG-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                      SEP-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                        NOV-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                     1
<CASH>                              $192,158
<SECURITIES>                        $0
<RECEIVABLES>                       $76,282
<ALLOWANCES>                        $4,101
<INVENTORY>                         $0
<CURRENT ASSETS>                    $544,046
<PP&E>                              $23,696
<DEPRECIATION>                      $12,121
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                      $934,450
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>               $111,657
<BONDS>                             $0
<COMMON>                            $512
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>               $0
<PREFERRED>                         $0
<OTHER-SE>                          $822,793
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>        $934,450
<SALES>                             $0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                    $172,926
<CGS>                               $0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                       $107,235
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                    $20,041
<LOSS-PROVISION>                    $0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                  $0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                     $52,544
<INCOME-TAX>                        $18,175
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                 $34,369
<DISCONTINUED>                      $0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                     $0
<CHANGES>                           $0
<NET-INCOME>                        $34,369
<EPS-PRIMARY>                       $0.94
<EPS-DILUTED>                       $0.91

        

</TABLE>
§ 51.1526 Application of tolerances. The contents of individual packages in the lot, based on sample inspection, are subject to the following limitations: ( a ) A package may contain not more than double any specified tolerance except that at least two defective and two off-size specimens may be permitted in any package: *Provided,* That the averages for the entire lot are within the tolerances specified for the grade.
( b ) [Reserved]
#### § 43.105 Operating characteristics (OC) curves.

The OC curves shows the ability of the various sampling plans, presented for each AQL, to distinguish between lots of different quality.
Exhibit 8.1

List of Subsidiaries



|                                                                                      |  |                              
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------
|Subsidiaries:                                                                         |  | Jurisdiction of Incorporation
|                                                                                      | 
|Beijing Decision Education & Consulting Company Limited                               |  | PRC                          
|Beijing Judgment Education & Consulting Company Limited                               |  | PRC                          
|Beijing Hewstone Technology Company                                                   |  | PRC                          
|New Oriental Education & Technology Group North America Branch                        |  | Canada                       
|Elite Concept Holdings Limited                                                        |  | Hong Kong                    
|                                                                                      | 
|Variable Interest Entities:                                                           |  |                              
|                                                                                      | 
|Beijing New Oriental Education & Technology (Group) Co., Ltd. (New Oriental China)* |  | PRC                          



|* | New Oriental China is the immediate parent company of the following subsidiaries, all of which are incorporated in the PRC:
|- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | 40 wholly-owned subsidiaries and one 51%-owned subsidiary that operate schools in China; and
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | 28 wholly-owned subsidiaries that operate New Orientals educational content, software and other technology development and distributions business, online
education business and overseas studies consulting business in China.
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exhibit 13.1

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, hereby certify that, to the best of our knowledge, the annual report on
Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011 of Mindray Medical International Limited (the Company) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report) fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

Date: April 30, 2012



|       |  |                                        
|------ |  | ---------------------------------------
|By:    |  | /s/ Xu Hang                            
|Name:  |  | Xu Hang                                
|Title: |  | Chairman and Co-Chief Executive Officer



|       |  |                                                   
|------ |  | --------------------------------------------------
|By:    |  | /s/ Li Xiting                                     
|Name:  |  | Li Xiting                                         
|Title: |  | Director, President and Co-Chief Executive Officer



|       |  |                        
|------ |  | -----------------------
|By:    |  | /s/ Alex Lung          
|Name:  |  | Alex Lung              
|Title: |  | Chief Financial Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as
part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
12.000 Scope of part.

This part prescribes policies and procedures unique to the acquisition of commercial products,

including commercial components, and commercial services. It implements the Federal

Government’s preference for the acquisition of commercial products and commercial services

contained in 41 U.S.C. 1906,1907, and 3307 and 10 U.S.C. 3451-3453 by establishing acquisition

policies more closely resembling those of the commercial marketplace and encouraging the

acquisition of commercial products and commercial services.

Parent topic: Part 12 - Acquisition of Commercial Products and Commercial Services
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2528 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Alkylketone. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 5, 2006 

Mr. TALENT introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Alkylketone. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. ALKYLKETONE. 

4 Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized Tar5 iff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting 

6 in numerical sequence the following new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.10.66 1–(4-Chlorophenyl)-4,4-dimethyl-3-pentanone (CAS 

No. 66346–01–8) (provided 

for in subheading 

2914.70.40) ......................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2009 ’’. 

7 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

8 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
2 

•S 2528 IS 

1 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

2 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the accompanying Annual Report of Kohlberg Capital
Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 (the Report), I, Michael I. Wirth, Principal Financial and Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as
adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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 14, 2008 |  | By: |  | /s/    MICHAEL I.
WIRTH                                                                          
|                     |  |     |  | Michael I. Wirth                                                                                 
|                     |  |     |  | Chief Financial Officer and Chief Compliance Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
§ 4288.1 Purpose and scope. ( a ) *Purpose.* The purpose of this program is to provide financial incentives to biorefineries in existence on June 18, 2008, the date of the enactment of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (the 2008 Farm Bill) (Pub. L. 110-246), to replace the use of fossil fuels used to produce heat or power at their facilities by installing new systems that use renewable biomass, or to produce new energy from renewable biomass.
( b ) *Scope.* The Agency may make payments under this program to any biorefinery that meets the requirements of the program up to the limits established for the program. Based on our research and survey of medium-sized project costs, the Agency has determined that the dollar amount identified will provide adequate incentive for biorefineries to apply. ( 1 ) The Agency will determine the amount of payments to be made to a biorefinery taking into consideration the percentage reduction in fossil fuel used by the biorefinery (including the quantity of fossil fuels a renewable biomass system is replacing), and the cost and cost-effectiveness of the renewable biomass system.
( 2 ) The Agency will determine who receives payment under this program based on the percentage reduction in fossil fuel used by the biorefinery that will result from the installation of the renewable biomass system; the cost and cost-effectiveness of the renewable biomass system; and other scoring criteria identified in § 4288.21. The above criteria will be used to determine priority for awards of 50 percent of total eligible project costs, up to the maximum award applicable for the fiscal year.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Irving Schulman, Respondent, v. 1347 Restaurant Corp. et al., Appellants. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

Reynolds, J.

Appeal by the employer and its carrier from a decision and award of the Workmen’s Compensation Board on the grounds that there is no substantial evidence to support the board’s findings of causal relationship and of a timely filed claim (Workmen’s Compensation Law, § 28). On April 1, 1965 claimant allegedly experienced a sudden pain in the groin and collapsed while lifting and carrying cases of liquor. Claimant's contention is that the activity of lifting the heavy eases enlarged his admittedly preexisting left inguinal hernia; appellants dispute any such relationship and introduced direct medical testimony to the contrary. Of course, the resolution of medical disputes between expert witnesses is exclusively in the board’s domain if its decision is supported by substantial evidence. Here while the testimony *607of claimant’s expert lacks the clarity and certainty which we would ideally hope for, we cannot say that such testimony when combined with his written report cannot be considered substantial evidence *(Matter of Ernest*v. *Boggs Lake Estates,*12 N Y 2d 414). Similarly, the question of the date of disablement is factual and there is substantial evidence to support the board’s conclusion that the date of disablement was April 3, 1965, the date claimant alleges he was no longer able to continue working because of the hernia (Workmen’s Compensation Law, § 42; *Matter of Silverman*v. *Little West Mfg. Co.,*20 A D 2d 612; *Matter of Montalvo*v. *Pioneer Pizza Pie Corp.,*20 A D 2d 603; *Matter of Weixler*v. *Schlegelmilch Bros.,*272 App. Div. 850, mot. for lv. to app. den. 297 N. Y. 1042). Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy and Staley, Jr., JJ., concur with Reynolds, J.
Editorial Note on Part 4290
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 4290 appear at 85 FR 16522, Mar. 24, 2020.

§ 4290.460 Restrictions on Common Control or ownership of two (or more) RBICs. Without the Agency's prior written approval, you must not have an officer, director, manager, Control Person, or owner (with a direct or indirect ownership interest of at least 10 percent) who is also: ( a ) An officer, director, manager, Control Person, or owner (with a direct or indirect ownership interest of at least 10 percent) of another RBIC; or
( b ) An officer or director of any Person that directly or indirectly controls, or is controlled by, or is under Common Control with, another RBIC.
#### § 51.1347 U.S. No. 2.

“U.S. No. 2” consists of pears of one variety which are mature, handpicked, firm, not seriously deformed, free from scald, hard end, black end, internal breakdown, decay, worms and worm holes, and free from serious damage by any other cause. Unless otherwise specified, the pears shall not be further advanced than yellowish green. Tree-ripened pears and pears grown from late blooms shall not be considered as meeting the requirements of this grade. (See §§ 51.1349 and 51.1350.)
22.1605 Contract clause.

(a) Insert the clause at 52.222-40, Notification of Employee Rights under the National Labor

Relations Act, in all solicitations and contracts, including acquisitions for commercial products,

commercial services, and commercially available off-the-shelf items, except acquisitions-

(1) Under the simplified acquisition threshold. For indefinite-quantity contracts, include the clause

only if the value of orders in any calendar year of the contract is expected to exceed the simplified

acquisition threshold;

(2) For work performed exclusively outside the United States; or

(3) Covered (in their entirety) by an exemption granted by the Secretary.

(b) A contracting agency may modify the clause at 52.222-40, if necessary, to reflect an exemption

granted by the Secretary (see 22.1603(b)).

Parent topic: Subpart 22.16 - Notification of Employee Rights Under the National Labor Relations

Act
June 24, 1015

Mr. Scott Morton

23806 SE 33 rd Street Issaquah, WA 98029

Dear Mr. Morton:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) . It explains why we can not process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We entered your June 5, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015-2146), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.2

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brenda Robeson Program Analyst, Airmen and Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
Case 1:02-cr-00043-MW-GRJ   Document 592   Filed 10/25/11   Page 1 of 2

Case 1:02-cr-00043-MW-GRJ   Document 592   Filed 10/25/11   Page 2 of 2