alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
- USGS Home
- Contact						   USGS
- Search 
USGS

- mobile menu barsUSGS Publications Warehouse
    Contact
    Explore recent publications 
    by USGS							   Authors
    Browse all of Pubs Warehouse 
    by							   Publication type and year
    FAQS
    Web 
    Service Documentation
    Other 
    Resources
    Descriptions of US 
    Geological Survey Report							   Series
- USGS Publications Warehouse
- Contact
- Explore recent publications 
    by USGS							   Authors
- Browse all of Pubs Warehouse 
    by							   Publication type and year
- FAQS
- Web 
    Service Documentation
- Other 
    Resources
- Descriptions of US 
    Geological Survey Report							   Series

- USGS Publications 
  Warehouse
- Explore					    
  Explore recent publications 
    by USGS							   Authors
    Browse all of Pubs Warehouse 
    by							   Publication type and year
- Explore recent publications 
    by USGS							   Authors
- Browse all of Pubs Warehouse 
    by							   Publication type and year
- Documentation					    
  FAQS
    Web 
    Service Documentation
    Other 
    Resources
    Descriptions of US 
    Geological Survey Report							   Series
- FAQS
- Web 
    Service Documentation
- Other 
    Resources
- Descriptions of US 
    Geological Survey Report							   Series
- Contact

### Fossil plants from the Stanley shale and Jackfork sandstone 
in southeastern Oklahoma and western Arkansas

#### Professional Paper 186-C

Tweet


#### Links

- Document: **Document**                                
  (pdf)
- Plates:
- **Plate 10**                                 
    (598 pdf)
- **Plate 11**                                 
    (718 pdf)
- **Plate 12**                                 
    (605 pdf)
- **Plate 13**                                 
    (594 pdf)
- **Plate 14**                                 
    (590 pdf)
- Download citation as:  RIS

#### Abstract

#### Additional publication details

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable 
Document Format (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it 
is recommended that you download the documents to your computer and open them 
with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your browser may not display or 
print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe 
Reader, free of charge. More information about viewing, downloading, and 
printing report files can be found here.

Accessibility
				    FOIA				    Privacy				    Policies and					   
Notices

U.S. Department of the					   Interior |				    
U.S. Geological 
Survey				   URL: http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/pp186C 
                    				   Page Contact Information: Pubs 
Warehouse Contact				   Page				   Page Last Modified: December 27, 2016 
14:26:19
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

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

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

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

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

LUIS ANGEL HERNANDEZ-RIOS,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 09-50573

D.C. No. 3:09-cr-00995-JAH

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

John A. Houston, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted September 13, 2010** 

Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. 

Luis Angel Hernandez-Rios appeals from the 60-month sentence imposed

following his guilty-plea conviction for transportation of illegal aliens and aiding

and abetting, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii) and (v)(II); and high

speed flight from an immigration checkpoint, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 758. We

FILED

OCT 05 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 09-50573

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Hernandez-Rios contends that the district court placed undue emphasis on

aggravating circumstances that were already taken into account by the Sentencing

Guidelines and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors when it imposed an

upward departure from the advisory Guidelines range. The district court departed

upward by two levels, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5K2.0, based upon a combination of

circumstances that were not adequately taken into consideration by the Guidelines. 

The record reflects that the district court carefully considered the § 3553(a)

sentencing factors, including the need to avoid unwarranted sentencing disparities,

and provided a well-reasoned and thorough explanation for the sentence imposed. 

The district court did not procedurally err, and the sentence is substantively

reasonable under the totality of the circumstances. See Gall v. United States, 552

U.S. 38, 51 (2007); see also United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th Cir.

2008) (en banc).

AFFIRMED.
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-7754

BOBBY EUGENE RODDY, a/k/a Running Cougar, Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA; OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR; MARY JO THOMPSON; JIM RUBENSTEIN; M. H. BAUSO; D. L. STAFFORD; WILLIAM FOX; TONY LEMASTERS; DON SPRINGSTON; DAN KIMBLE; WILLIAM D. HALE; BARBARA RENNER; KENT HOBBS, Reverend; ROBERT ADAMS; DENNIS MUELLER; DUANE MUNDAY; SUSAN WADE; JOE CARROLL; MICHAEL HENTHORN; JANE DOE; JOHN DOE; JAELL FULTON; CORRECTIVE MEDICAL SERVICES; DIANE SHINGLER; KAROL PAYNE; VICKIE CAIN; TAMMY HARLAN; PATRICK MIRANDY; SHEILA RAMSEY; JACK STALLINGS; MISTY ADAMS; CAPTAIN ANDERSON; KATY PRATT, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., District Judge. (5:05-cv-00170-FPS)
Submitted: March 30, 2007 Decided: April 16, 2007
Before WILKINSON and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.- 2 - Bobby Eugene Roddy, Appellant Pro Se. Charles R. Bailey, Billie Jo Streyle, Jason A. Winnell, BAILEY & WYANT, PLLC, Charleston, West Virginia; Virginia Grottendieck Lanham, South Charleston, West Virginia; John A. Hoyer, STATE POLICE LEGAL COUNSEL, South Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.* The district court described this claim as the “free exercise of religion claim” (R. 54 at 10) and dismissed the claim sua sponte for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
- 3 - PER CURIAM: Bobby Eugene Roddy appeals the district court’s order accepting in part the recommendations of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. Roddy raises three issues on appeal: (1) that his legal mail was improperly opened; (2) that the West Virginia Department of Corrections Policy Directive 503.00 is unconstitutional; and (3) that his free exercise of religion claim was improperly dismissed. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error for the first two issues. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Roddy v. West Virginia , No. 5:05-cv-00170-FPS (N.D. W. Va. Sept. 21, 2006). For Roddy’s third issue, * however, we vacate and remand in light of the Supreme Court’s recent opinion in Jones v. Bock , ___U.S.___, 127 S. Ct. 910 (2007). 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.

AFFIRMED IN PART , VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED
#### Abe Steinbrecher *v.*Fairfield County Trust Company

*Sidney Vogel,*in support of the petition.

*Lawrence P. Dennin, Jr.,*in opposition.

Submitted December 24, 1968

decided February 4, 1969

The petition by the plaintiff for certification for appeal from the Appellate Division of the Circuit Court is denied.
**Exhibit31.2**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, Sean Donaghy, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Ebix, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the designor operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.
| Date:  August 10, 2007 | /s/ Sean Donaghy                  |   |
|----------------------------------|-----------------------------------|--------|
|                             | Sean Donaghy                      |   |
|                             | Interim Chief  Accounting Officer |   |

 

 

----
§ 876.4370 Gastroenterology-urology evacuator. ( a ) *Identification.* A gastroenterology-urology evacuator is a device used to remove debris and fluids during gastroenterological and urological procedures by drainage, aspiration, or irrigation. This generic type of device includes the fluid evacuator system, manually powered bladder evacuator, and the AC-powered vacuum pump.
( b ) *Classification.* ( 1 ) Class II (special controls) for the gastroenterology-urology evacuator when other than manually powered. The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to § 876.9.
( 2 ) Class I for the gastroenterology-urology evacuator when manually powered. The device subject to this paragraph (b)(2) is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter.
[48 FR 53023, Nov. 23, 1983, as amended at 54 FR 25049, June 12, 1989; 63 FR 59228, Nov. 3, 1998]
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

 FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

FREDERICK ADDISON,

Appellant,

v. Case No. 5D17-2692

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

________________________________/

Opinion filed December 22, 2017

3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court 

for Citrus County,

Richard A. Howard, Judge.

Frederick Addison, Bristol, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, and Nora Hutchinson Hall, 

Assistant Attorney General, Daytona 

Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Frederick Addison appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction 

relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Because the record 

does not conclusively refute Addison’s claim that counsel was ineffective for failing to 

depose or call the victim to testify for mitigation purposes at his sentencing on the violation 

of probation, we reverse the order summarily denying his motion and remand for 
2

attachment of portions of the record conclusively refuting the claim or for an evidentiary 

hearing. See Freeman v. State, 761 So. 2d 1055, 1061 (Fla. 2000) ("[A] defendant is 

entitled to an evidentiary hearing on a postconviction relief motion unless (1) the motion, 

files, and records in the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief, 

or (2) the motion or a particular claim is legally insufficient." (citing Maharaj v. State, 684 

So. 2d 726 (Fla. 1996))).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

ORFINGER, BERGER and WALLIS, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 46 (Wednesday, March 10, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 11189]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-5006]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Health Resources and Services Administration


Bureau of Health Professions; All Advisory Committee Meeting; 
Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting:

    Name: Bureau of Health Professions All-Advisory Committee 
Meeting (AACM).
    Dates and Times: April 21, 2010, 8 a.m.-5 p.m.
    Place: Doubletree Hotel & Executive Meeting Center, 8120 
Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.
    Telephone: 301-652-2000.
    Status: The meeting will be open to the public.
    Purpose: The purpose of the meeting is to provide a venue for 
the Bureau of Health Professions' (BHPr) four advisory committees 
[the Council on Graduate Medical Education (COGME), the Advisory 
Committee on Training in Primary Care Medicine and Dentistry 
(ACTPCMD), the Advisory Committee on Interdisciplinary, Community-
Based Linkages (ACICBL), and the National Advisory Council on Nurse 
Education and Practice (NACNEP)] to continue their joint work on 
interdisciplinary education and practice, and to also discuss and 
identify future opportunities for collaboration.
    Agenda: The AACM agenda will include updates on Bureau and 
Departmental priorities, discussion of the joint work on 
interdisciplinary education and practice, and proposals for future 
Advisory Committee collaboration. Agenda items are subject to change 
as priorities dictate.
    For Further Information Contact:
    Anyone interested in obtaining a roster of members, minutes of 
the meeting, or other relevant information can contact the Bureau of 
Health Professions, Office of the Associate Administrator, 5600 
Fishers Lane, room 9-05, Rockville, Maryland, 20857, telephone (301) 
443-5794. Information can also be found at the following Web site: 
http://bhpr.hrsa.gov/.

    Dated: March 2, 2010.
Sahira Rafiullah,
Director, Division of Policy and Information Coordination.

[FR Doc. 2010-5006 Filed 3-9-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4165-15-P
REGULATORY EVALUATION

Directorate Identifier: ___2013_______-NM-____180______-AD

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 

entities?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific 

requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of 

transportation?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Farm Credit Administration

          - 12 CFR Part 617
          - RIN 3052-AC45

# AGENCY:

Farm Credit Administration.

# ACTION:

Notice of effective date.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Farm Credit Administration (FCA or Agency), through the FCA Board (Board), issued a final rule under part 617 on December 22, 2009 (74 FR 67970) amending FCA's regulations to ensure that borrowers with loans directly tied to a widely publicized external index receive appropriate disclosure of interest rate changes in accordance with statutory requirements while allowing Farm Credit System institutions to provide the notices in a more efficient manner. In accordance with 12 U.S.C. 2252, the effective date of the final rule is 30 days from the date of publication in the                         **Federal Register**                         during which either or both Houses of Congress are in session. Based on the records of the sessions of Congress, the effective date of the regulations is March 2, 2010.                    

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         Under the authority of 12 U.S.C. 2252, the regulation amending 12 CFR part 617 published on December 22, 2009 (74 FR 67970) is effective March 2, 2010.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jacqueline R. Melvin, Policy Analyst, Office of Regulatory Policy, Farm Credit Administration, McLean, Virginia 22102-5090, (703) 883-4498, TTY (703) 883-4434, or Howard Rubin, Senior Counsel, Office of General Counsel, Farm Credit Administration, McLean, Virginia 22102-5090, (703) 883-4020, TTY (703) 883-4020.

(12 U.S.C. 2252(a)(9) and (10))

Dated: March 3, 2010.

Roland E. Smith,

*Secretary,**Farm Credit Administration Board.*

[FR Doc. 2010-4858 Filed 3-5-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6705-01-P
Editorial Note on Part 886
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 886 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 886.1350 Keratoscope. ( a ) *Identification.* A keratoscope is an AC-powered or battery-powered device intended to measure and evaluate the corneal curvature of the eye. Lines and circles within the keratoscope are used to observe the corneal reflex. This generic type of device includes the photokeratoscope which records corneal curvature by taking photographs of the cornea.
( b ) The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to § 886.9. The battery-powered device is exempt from the current good manufacturing practice requirements of the quality system regulation in part 820 of this chapter, with the exception of § 820.180 of this chapter, with respect to general requirements concerning records, and § 820.198 of this chapter, with respect to complaint files
[55 FR 48441, Nov. 20, 1990, as amended at 59 FR 63012, Dec. 7, 1994; 65 FR 2320, Jan. 14, 2000]
#### Stavroula G. Pappas *v.*Andrew Pappas

*C. George Kanabis,*in support of the motion.

*Louis C. Wool,*in opposition.

Submitted July 15

decided July 22, 1969

The motion by the defendant for this court to review the action of the trial court terminating the stay in the appeal from the Superior Court in New London County is denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1996
<CASH>                                       3,477,930
<SECURITIES>                                33,250,407
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,299,928
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  6,011,821
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            44,225,159
<PP&E>                                       7,287,659
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,212,483
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              50,435,299
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,247,302
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      8,750
<COMMON>                                       286,750
<OTHER-SE>                                  45,397,497
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                50,435,299
<SALES>                                      1,723,045
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,723,045
<CGS>                                        1,617,698
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,617,698
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             4,595,745
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              29,054
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (3,970,701)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (3,970,701)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (3,970,701)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
§ 876.4560 Ribdam. ( a ) *Identification.* A ribdam is a device that consists of a broad strip of latex with supporting ribs used to drain surgical wounds where copious urine drainage is expected.
( b ) *Classification.* Class I (general controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to the limitations in § 876.9.
[48 FR 53023, Nov. 23, 1983, as amended at 54 FR 25049, June 12, 1989; 66 FR 38801, July 25, 2001]