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

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM RENT-A-WRECK
OF AMERICA'S  10-QSB FOR THE  QUARTERLY  PERIOD ENDED  SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10-QSB.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                       1,822,454
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,666,195
<ALLOWANCES>                                   741,564
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,069,837
<PP&E>                                         670,331
<DEPRECIATION>                                 323,117
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,631,198
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,310,804
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           13,660
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        40,988
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,265,746
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,631,198
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,951,873
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,303,485
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               871,224
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                78,879
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              11,308
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                730,314
<INCOME-TAX>                                   228,802
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            501,512
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   501,512
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .09
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADDED BY

SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of First Community Financial Corporation, (the
Company) for the period ended September 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Richard R. Leitzel, Chief Financial 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 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2. To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of the operations of the Company as of and for the period covered by the Report.



|                        |  |     |  |                              
|----------------------- |  | --- |  | -----------------------------
|Date: November 14, 2008 |  | By: |  | /s/ Richard R. Leitzel       
|                        |  |     |  | Richard R. Leitzel,          
|                        |  |     |  | Chief Financial Officer      
|                        |  |     |  | (Principal Financial Officer)
Case 2:06-cv-00642-MEF-SRW Document 45 Filed 12/13/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:06-cv-00642-MEF-SRW Document 45 Filed 12/13/2007 Page 2 of 2
Case 2:06-cv-00717-ID-SRW Document 14 Filed 09/05/2006 Page 1 of 1
H. Res. 12

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

January 4, 2005.

Whereas on December 26, 2004, a powerful earthquake

measuring 9.0 on the Richter Scale occurred off the west

coast of Northern Sumatra, Indonesia;

Whereas the undersea earthquake created massive tsunamis

that struck several countries throughout South and

Southeast Asia, as well as on the coast of East Africa;

Whereas the giant waves caused death and destruction on a

nearly unprecedented scale, killing more than 140,000

people and leaving millions homeless;

Whereas many thousands of people were killed in Indonesia,

Sri Lanka, India, and Thailand, and numerous others

were killed in Somalia, Malaysia, Maldives, Bangladesh,

Kenya, Burma, and elsewhere;

Whereas an estimated one-third of the earthquake and tsunami victims were children, and many thousands more

have been left orphaned or separated from their families;

Whereas thousands of visitors and tourists from nearly 40

countries were killed in this natural disaster;

Whereas between 3,000,000 and 5,000,000 people throughout

the affected region are lacking basic survival requirements as a result of the tsunamis and there remains the

risk of numerous additional deaths due to shortages of
2

•HRES 12 EH

clean water, adequate shelter, food, sanitation, and basic

healthcare;

Whereas the United States and other donors have, to date,

pledged an estimated $2,000,000,000 in emergency and

long-term reconstruction assistance; and

Whereas the human cost of this disaster transcends mere statistics and has resulted in deeply personal tragedies for

countless families in the region and throughout the

world: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives—

(1) mourns the horrific loss of life caused by the

earthquake and tsunamis that occurred on December 26,

2004, in South and Southeast Asia;

(2) expresses its deep condolences to the families of

the many earthquake and tsunami victims;

(3) applauds the prompt humanitarian response to

the tsunami tragedy by governments, the United Nations

and other international organizations, and nongovernmental organizations;

(4) recognizes the generous outpouring of support

for relief efforts from private citizens around the world,

including in the United States;

(5) affirms its commitment to additional generous

United States support for relief and long-term reconstruction efforts in areas affected by the earthquake and

tsunamis; and
3

•HRES 12 EH

(6) urges continued attention by donors and relief

agencies to the needs of vulnerable populations in the

stricken countries, particularly the thousands of children

who have been left parentless and homeless by this disaster.

Attest:

Clerk.
#### In re BOUCK.

(District Court, S. D. New York.

June, 1912.)

1. Bankruptcy (§ 414*) — Discharge—Objections—Specifications.

AVhere objections to a bankrupt’s discharge were based entirely on the ground that the bankrupt had been guilty of a conveyance with intent to defraud creditors, the fact that he was guilty of concealment of property was immaterial.

[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Bankruptcy, Cent. Dig. §§ 720-722; Dec. Dig. § 414.*]

2. Bankruptcy (§ 407*) — Discharge—Preferential Payment.

The fact that a bankrupt made a preferential payment is not ground for denial of a discharge.

[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Bankruptcy, Cent. Dig. §§ 729-731, 737, 7.38, 740-751, 758, 700, 761; Dec. Dig. § 407.*]

in Bankruptcy. In the matter of bankruptcy proceedings of one Bouck. On motion to confirm the report of a referee recommending the bankrupt’s discharge.

Granted.

Orin Q. Flint, for bankrupt.

Samuel B. Coffin (Guernsey Price, of counsel), for objecting creditor.

*

For other cases see same topic *&*§ niumbeb in Doc. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Itop’r Indexes

HOUGH, District Judge.

[1] The objections to discharge are entirely upon the ground that the bankrupt has been guilty of conveyance with intent to hinder, delay, and defraud creditors. The master’s memorandum seems to me to be based rather on the thought that the bankrupt was accused of concealing property. Even if he did conceal property, that idea is not material here, because it is not set forth in the specifications. The meager testimony is uncontradicted and extremely simple. The bankrupt had a blacksmith shop, and' sold it out, and with the proceeds employed an attorney, in order that he might go into bankruptcy, paid a small debt or two, and gave his wife $20 to buy groceries.

[2] I think in the evidence there was a preferential payment, but that is not ground for denying discharge. The sole inquiry in this case is whether in the evidence there was a conveyance with intent to hinder, delay, and defraud.. The rules on this point have recently been stated authoritatively hv our Circuit Court of Appeals in Van Iderstine v. National Discount Co. (C. C. A., 2d Cir.) 23 Am. Bankr. Rep. 345, 347, 174 Fed. 518, 521, 98 C. C. A. 300. Applying these rules to the facts here, I am unable to perceive that there was any intent on Bouck’s part to do the forbidden act.

The report is confirmed, and the discharge granted.
Part 5624 - PROTECTION OF PRIVACY AND

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION

Subpart 5624.2 - FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT

5624.203 Policy.

Subpart 5624.2 - FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT

5624.203 Policy.

(Revised June 2021)

Each contracting office shall utilize their component's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) office

process. Contracting offices may contact USSOCOM Command Information Services Division FOIA

Manager (SOCS-SJS-VI) for additional assistance.

HQ, United States Special Operations Command

Special Operations Forces Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (SOF AT&L)

SOFARS 5624

February 2007
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-50371

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ARIEL VALLEJO-GONZALEZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:12-CR-1255-1

Before JOLLY, DeMOSS, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Ariel Vallejo-Gonzalez appeals the sentence imposed for his conviction 

for illegal reentry into the United States. He contends that his sentence is 

substantively unreasonable because it was greater than necessary to 

accomplish the sentencing goals under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). The district court 

sentenced him within his guidelines range to 32 months of imprisonment and 

three years of supervised release.

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 19, 2013

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 13-50371 Document: 00512476414 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/19/2013
No. 13-50371

The substantive reasonableness of a sentence is reviewed under an 

abuse-of-discretion standard. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). 

Because Vallejo-Gonzalez’s sentence was within his advisory guidelines range, 

his sentence is presumptively reasonable. See United States v. Gomez-Herrera, 

523 F.3d 554, 565-66 (5th Cir. 2008). Vallejo-Gonzalez wishes to preserve for 

further review the argument that the presumption of reasonableness should 

not apply to within-guidelines sentences calculated under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 

because § 2L1.2 lacks an empirical basis. As conceded by him, such an 

argument is foreclosed by our precedent. See United States v. Rodriguez, 660 

F.3d 231, 232-33 (5th Cir. 2011).

Vallejo-Gonzalez argues that his sentence was greater than necessary 

because § 2L1.2 lacks an empirical basis and gives heavy weight to a 

defendant’s criminal history through enhancements, such as his crime-ofviolence enhancement, that are based on prior convictions. He notes that the 

conviction underlying his crime-of-violence enhancement was not assessed any 

criminal history points because it occurred too long ago. He further contends 

that the guidelines range overstated the seriousness of his instant illegal 

reentry offense and failed to reflect his personal history and characteristics.

The district court listened to Vallejo-Gonzalez’s arguments for a lesser 

sentence but found that a 32-month sentence was appropriate. “[T]he 

sentencing judge is in a superior position to find facts and judge their import 

under § 3553(a) with respect to a particular defendant.” United States v. 

Campos-Maldonado, 531 F.3d 337, 339 (5th Cir. 2008). Vallejo-Gonzalez has 

not shown that his sentence was an abuse of discretion. See United States v. 

Duarte, 569 F.3d 528, 529-31 (5th Cir. 2009); Gomez-Herrera, 523 F.3d at 565-

66.

AFFIRMED.

2

 Case: 13-50371 Document: 00512476414 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/19/2013
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3538 

To suspend temporarily the duty on unbleached printcloth. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 20, 2006 

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

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on unbleached printcloth. 

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

3 SECTION 1. UNBLEACHED PRINTCLOTH. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.52.10 Unbleached printcloth, less than 85 percent by weight of cotton, mixed with 

man-made fibers, weighing less than or 

equal to 200 g/m2, of average yarn, number 43 to 68, of width exceeding 225 

centimeters (provided for in subheading 

5210.11.60) ............................................. Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2009 ’’. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
2 

•S 3538 IS 

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

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          56,616
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                   628
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    345,644
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                      1,632,824
<ALLOWANCE>                                     18,987
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,134,595
<DEPOSITS>                                   1,637,155
<SHORT-TERM>                                    82,595
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             16,728
<LONG-TERM>                                    164,894
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        16,890
<OTHER-SE>                                     212,165
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               2,134,595
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 70,969
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                9,934
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   439
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                81,342
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              30,405
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              36,783
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           44,559
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    2,100
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                               (638)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 28,620
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 20,871
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      20,871
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    14,182
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .84
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .84
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                       0
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                     0
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                    0
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.41






Exhibit 10.41




DIRECTOR COMPENSATION POLICY

(effective as of January 1, 2010)




Members of the board of directors (the “Board”) of BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. (the
“Company”) who are not employees of the Company or any of its subsidiaries (each a
“Non-Employee Director”) shall be eligible to receive cash and equity compensation as set
forth in this Director Compensation Policy. The cash compensation and restricted stock grants
described in this Director Compensation Policy shall be paid or be made, as applicable,
automatically and without further action of the Board or its Compensation Committee, to each
Non-Employee Director who may be eligible to receive such cash compensation or restricted stock
unless such Non-Employee Director declines the receipt of such cash compensation or restricted
stock by notice to the Company. This Director Compensation Policy shall remain in effect until it
is revised or rescinded by further action of the Board or its Compensation Committee.




1. Cash Compensation and Reimbursement of Expenses.



(a) Annual Fee. Each Non-Employee Director shall be eligible to receive an annual fee
of $35,000 for service on the Board, the Non-Employee Director who regularly chairs the Audit
Committee of the Board shall be eligible to receive an additional annual fee of $15,000, and each
Non-Employee Director who regularly chairs any other committee of the Board shall be eligible to
receive an additional annual fee of $10,000 for each committee chaired. The fees shall be payable
in equal quarterly installments in arrears on or about January 15, April 15, July 15 and October 15
of each year.




(b) Meeting Stipends.




(1) Board of Directors. Each Non-Employee Director shall be eligible for an
additional stipend of $1,500 for each Board meeting attended in person and by telephone.




(2) Audit Committee. Each Non-Employee Director who serves on the Audit
Committee of the Board shall be eligible for an additional stipend of $1,500 for each
committee meeting attended in person and by telephone (whether or not the committee meeting
is on a day that includes a Board meeting).




(3) Other Committees. Each Non-Employee Director who serves on a committee of
the Board other than the Audit Committee shall be eligible for an additional stipend of
$1,000 for each committee meeting attended in person and by telephone (whether or not the
committee meeting is on a day that includes a Board meeting).



(c) Reimbursement of Expenses. Non-Employee Directors shall be eligible for
reimbursement for reasonable expenses incurred to attend Board and committee meetings.



2. Equity Compensation. Non-Employee Directors shall be eligible to receive grants of
restricted stock as set forth in the Company’s 2004 Incentive Award Plan (the “2004 Plan”),
which grants shall be subject to the terms and provisions of the 2004 Plan and the execution and
delivery of restricted stock agreements (including all exhibits thereto), in substantially the form
previously approved by the Board, setting forth the vesting schedule applicable to such restricted
stock and such other terms as may be required by the 2004 Plan.
Danny Jordan, Third District, President Sammy Coffey, Second District, Vice-Pres. Dwight Pickens, First District Randy Owen, Fourth District Benny Rakestraw, Fifth District

Mr. Dennis DeVany 

### Union County Board of Supervisors POST OFFICE BOX 847 NEW ALBANY, MISSISSIPPI 38652 (662) 534-1902 April 30, 2012

Chief, EAS & Domestic Analysis Division Office ofAviation Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. Washington, D.C. 20590 RE: Tupelo Regional Airport (TUP) Docket DOT-OST-2009-0305 Our File No.: 51.00 Dear Ms. DeVany: Annette M. Hickey, Clerk Terry Johnson, Administrator Thad J. Mueller, Attorney

C) .C'

Onbehalf ofthe Board of

### Supe~isors ofUnionCounty, Mississippi, 1write in support p;fSilver Airways service option 

### 1into the Atlanta airport. 

### Itis Qur understanding that since the City of Tupelo has been a recipient ofthe Essential Airport Service Program, the Tupelo airport has experienced reductions in flight, excessive late flights and cancellations with the current servicer. Silver Airways' proposed flights into Atlanta benefits our local businesses, including those in Union County, because ofincreased options available from other carriers who will offer a greater number offlights to a wider variety ofdestinations.
.·'**~dditional** reduction i.1,1 Tupelo'.s airline service resulting from,smaller aircraft, no baggage ., transfer, repeated scre,ening, and difficult boarding pass procedureswill senre to discouragt?

## .us .. and our clients from using Tupelo's airport.
. . . . · · .'· ·· · . i , I • < We ask that you give strong consideration to Silver Airways service option 1 over Air Choice One.**~** !"! • ,

ION COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
727.409 Solicitation provisions and contract clauses.       (a) When the contracting officer inserts (48 CFR) FAR 52.227–14, and if the release or publication of data first produced in the performance of the contract may be sensitive to U.S. Government relations with the cooperating country, the contracting officer must use the clause at (48 CFR) AIDAR 752.227–14.          (b) through (m) [Reserved]          (n) The prescriptions for provisions and clauses in (48 CFR) FAR 27.409 apply to all USAID contracts regardless of place of performance.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 727.4—Rights in Data and Copyrights
# Subpart 1520.3 - Labor Surplus Area Subcontracting Program [Reserved]

**Parent topic:**PART 1520 - LABOR SURPLUS AREA CONCERNS
#### § 987.8 Handler.

*Handler* means any person handling dates which have not been inspected and certified for handling in the hands of a previous holder and any repacker: *Provided,* That for the purposes of §§ 987.21 and 987.24 a person shall qualify as a handler only if he has acquired the dates directly from producers.

[32 FR 12595, Aug. 31, 1967, as amended at 43 FR 4250, Feb. 1, 1978]