alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<meta name="pdf:PDFVersion" content="1.2">
<meta name="xmp:CreatorTool" content="Acrobat Capture Server 2.0">
<meta name="pdf:hasXFA" content="false">
<meta name="access_permission:modify_annotations" content="true">
<meta name="dc:creator" content="capture">
<meta name="dcterms:created" content="1998-09-14T19:29:49Z">
<meta name="dcterms:modified" content="1998-09-14T19:29:50Z">
<meta name="dc:format" content="application/pdf; version=1.2">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:creator_tool" content="Acrobat Capture Server 2.0">
<meta name="access_permission:fill_in_form" content="true">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:modified" content="1998-09-14T19:29:50Z">
<meta name="pdf:hasCollection" content="false">
<meta name="pdf:encrypted" content="false">
<meta name="Content-Length" content="14326">
<meta name="pdf:hasMarkedContent" content="false">
<meta name="Content-Type" content="application/pdf">
<meta name="access_permission:can_print_faithful" content="true">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:creator" content="capture">
<meta name="pdf:producer" content="Acrobat PDFWriter 3.02 for Windows NT">
<meta name="access_permission:extract_for_accessibility" content="true">
<meta name="access_permission:assemble_document" content="true">
<meta name="xmpTPg:NPages" content="1">
<meta name="pdf:hasXMP" content="false">
<meta name="access_permission:extract_content" content="true">
<meta name="access_permission:can_print" content="true">
<meta name="X-TIKA:Parsed-By" content="org.apache.tika.parser.DefaultParser">
<meta name="X-TIKA:Parsed-By" content="org.apache.tika.parser.pdf.PDFParser">
<meta name="access_permission:can_modify" content="true">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:producer" content="Acrobat PDFWriter 3.02 for Windows NT">
<meta name="pdf:docinfo:created" content="1998-09-14T19:29:49Z">
<title></title>
</head>
<body><div class="page"><p></p>
<p>OPINION W o-7429 WAS NEVER ISSUED OR 
</p>
<p>WAS WITHDRAWN. </p>
<p></p>
</div>
</body></html>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAY-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   AUG-31-2000
<CASH>                                         206
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         131,175
<DEPRECIATION>                                 9,517
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 121,864
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          90,905
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       4,580
<OTHER-SE>                                     26,379
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   121,864
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               1315
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1315)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1315)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1315)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.00)



</TABLE>
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1243

To require the President to notify the Congress of certain arms sales to

Saudi Arabia until certain outstanding commercial disputes between

United States nationals and the Government of Saudi Arabia are resolved.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 15, 1995

Mr. ANDREWS (for himself and Mr. DEUTSCH) introduced the following bill;

which was referred to the Committee on International Relations

A BILL

To require the President to notify the Congress of certain

arms sales to Saudi Arabia until certain outstanding

commercial disputes between United States nationals and

the Government of Saudi Arabia are resolved.

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

3 SECTION 1. NOTIFICATION OF ARMS SALES.

4 Until the certification under section 2 is submitted

5 to the Congress, section 36(b)(1) of the Arms Export Con6 trol Act shall be applied to sales to Saudi Arabia by sub7 stituting in the first sentence ‘‘$10,000,000’’ for
2

•HR 1243 IH

1 ‘‘$50,000,000’’, ‘‘$50,000,000’’ for ‘‘$200,000,000’’, and

2 ‘‘$2,000,000’’ for ‘‘$14,000,000’’.

3 SEC. 2. CERTIFICATION.

4 Section 1 shall cease to apply if and when the Sec5 retary of State certifies and reports in writing to the Con6 gress that the unpaid claims of American firms against

7 the Government of Saudi Arabia that—

8 (1) are described in the June 30, 1993, report

9 by the Secretary of Defense pursuant to section

10 9140(c) of the Department of Defense Appropria11 tions Act, 1993 (Public Law 102–396; 106 Stat.

12 1939), or

13 (2) are otherwise outstanding before the date of

14 the enactment of this Act and have been litigated

15 fully in the courts of Saudi Arabia but in the opin16 ion of the Secretary of State have not been resolved

17 in accordance with standards of fairness as deter18 mined by the Secretary of State,

19 including the additional claims noticed by the Department

20 of Commerce on page 2 of that report, have been resolved

21 satisfactorily.

Æ
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13

- 10114 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.

HOSIE TUCKER , also known as Hosie Tucker, III ,
Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal s from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:12

- CR

- 161

- 1

Before KING, HAYNES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
The attorney appointed to represent Hosie Tucker has moved for leave
to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 3 86 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011).
Tucker h a s not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review.

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED June 17, 2014 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 13-10114 Document: 00512665767 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/17/2014No. 13

- 10114

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is
excused from further re sponsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED.
See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2.

2 Case: 13-10114 Document: 00512665767 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/17/2014
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         233,142
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  329,369
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (25,743)
<INVENTORY>                                    363,865
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,158,461
<PP&E>                                         632,035
<DEPRECIATION>                                 437,006
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,665,624
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,016,589
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         38
<COMMON>                                         8,959
<OTHER-SE>                                  25,160,480
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,665,624
<SALES>                                        779,414
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               779,414
<CGS>                                          621,494
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,995,868
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                21,149
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             145,525
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,464
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (3,068,086)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Anthony Antonio SMITH, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 02-6426.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted May 30, 2002.

Decided June 7, 2002.

Anthony Antonio Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Jean Howard, Office of the United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

*623PER CURIAM.

Anthony Antonio Smith seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2001). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. *See United States v. Smith,*Nos. CR-97-129; CA-01-8599-6-13 (D.S.C. filed Jan. 30, 2002 & entered Jan. 31, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter II

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at 78 FR 60697, Oct. 2, 2013.

#### § 315.49 Correction of errors.

A bond may be reissued to correct an error in registration upon appropriate request, supported by satisfactory proof of the error.
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.                  

###### National Science Foundation

In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L., 92-463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the following meeting:

*Name:*                         Advisory Committee for Biological Sciences (BIO) #1110.                    

*Date and Time:*                         September 10, 2009—8:30 a.m.-5 p.m.,September 11, 2009—8:30 a.m.-3 p.m.                    

*Place:*                         National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230, Room 375.                    

*Type of Meeting:*                         Open.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Dr. Joann Roskoski, Executive Officer, Biological Sciences, Room 605, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230;                         *Tel No.:*                         (703) 292-8400.                    

*Minutes:*                         May be obtained from the contact person listed above.                    

*Purpose of Meeting:*                         The Advisory Committee for BIO provides advice, recommendations, and oversight concerning major program emphases, directions, and goals for the research-related activities of the divisions that make up BIO.                    

*Agenda:*
    - Assistant Director, BIO reports on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and FY'09 Budget.
    - Undergraduate Education in Biology.
    - Environmental Research and Education Report.
    - National Ecological Observatory Network Report.

Dated: August 11, 2009.

Susanne Bolton,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. E9-19475 Filed 8-13-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
IA

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 168

Waiving certain enrollment requirements with respect to two bills of the

One Hundred Fourth Congress.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 26, 1996

Mr. NEY introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on House Oversight

MARCH 26, 1996

The Committee on House Oversight discharged; considered and passed

JOINT RESOLUTION

Waiving certain enrollment requirements with respect to two

bills of the One Hundred Fourth Congress.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That the provisions of sections 106 and 107 of title 1,

4 United States Code, are waived with respect to the print5 ing (on parchment or otherwise) of the enrollment of H.R.

6 3019 and the enrollment of H.R. 3136, each of the One

7 Hundred Fourth Congress. The enrollment of either such

8 bill shall be in such form as the Committee on House
2

•HJ 168 CPH

1 Oversight of the House of Representatives certifies to be

2 a true enrollment.

Æ
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Susan DIAZ, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 00-50709.

D.C. No. CR-00-01856-IEG.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*881Submitted June 10, 2002.*

Decided June 14, 2002.

Before RYMER, T.G. NELSON, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

*

This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Susan Diaz appeals following her conviction by conditional guilty plea to one count of importation of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Diaz contends that her indictment must be dismissed, because sections 952 and 960 are unconstitutional under *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 490, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000) and *United States v. Nordby,*225 F.3d 1053, 1058-59 (9th Cir.2000). This contention is foreclosed by our decisions in *United States v. Buckland,*289 F.3d 558, 568 (9th Cir.2002) (en banc) (overruling Nordby’s conclusion that Congress committed drug quantity to the sentencing judge to decide by a preponderance of the evidence), *cert. denied,*2002 WL 764233 (U.S. May 28, 2002) (No. 01-9813); *United States v. Varela-Rivera,*279 F.3d 1174, 1175 n. 1 (9th Cir.2002) (rejecting constitutional challenge to section 952 in light of Buckland); and *United States v. Mendoza-Paz,*286 F.3d 1104, 1109-10 (9th Cir.2002) (concluding that *Apprendi*does not render section 960 facially unconstitutional).

Diaz contends, in the alternative, that section 960 requires the government to plead and prove mens rea as to drug type and quantity. We recently rejected this argument in *United States v. Carranza,*289 F.3d 634, 644 (9th Cir.2002) (holding that, even after *Apprendi,*the government need only show that the defendant knew she imported *some*controlled substance).1

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

1

. Diaz’s motion for further briefing on the panel decision in *United States v. Buckland,*259 F.3d 1157 (9th Cir.2001), is denied as moot.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

October 29, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
134256 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 134256 COA: 275626 Muskegon CC: 02-047857-FC ALPHONSO SONES, SR., Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appe al the June 12, 2007 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, a nd it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishi ng entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

t1022 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

October 29, 2007

Clerk
#### § 1020.312 Identification required.

Refer to § 1010.312 of this chapter for identification requirements for reports of transactions in currency filed by banks.
Exhibit 99.1

                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 of Worldport  Communications,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
the  undersigned  Chief  Executive  Officer and Chief  Financial  Officer of the
Company  hereby  certifies,  pursuant  to 18 U.S.C.  Section  1350,  as  adopted
pursuant to Section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 that,  based on her
knowledge:  i) the Report fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a)
or  15(d)  of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of  1934,  and ii) the  information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition  and  results of  operations  of the Company as of and for the periods
covered in the Report.


  /s/ Kathleen A. Cote
---------------------------------------
Kathleen A. Cote
Chief Executive Officer and acting Chief Financial Officer


August 19, 2002
#### § 29.312 All requirements for credit must be satisfied by June 30, 1997.

Service is counted toward Federal Benefit Payments only if all requirements for the service to be creditable are satisfied as of June 30, 1997.
Filed 7/18/06 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2006 ND 150

State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee

v.

Bruce Lynn Entzi, Defendant and Appellant

No. 20060066

Appeal from the District Court of McIntosh County, South Central Judicial District, the Honorable Thomas J. Schneider, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Terry W. Elhard, State’s Attorney, P.O. Box 99, Ashley, ND 58413-0099, for plaintiff and appellee.

Chad R. McCabe, Vinje Law Firm, 523 N. 4th Street, Ste. 3, Bismarck, ND 58501-4055, for defendant and appellant.

State v. Entzi

No. 20060066

Per Curiam.

[¶1]Bruce Entzi filed a motion to terminate his probation.  The district court found the Criminal Judgment and Commitment clearly stated his probationary period was to begin following his period of imprisonment.  The district court denied the motion finding Entzi’s 5 year probationary period began in January 2004 when his imprisonment was to end.  Entzi appealed.

[¶2]Entzi contends a condition of probation was to be completed while he was in prison and therefore he was on probation while in prison.  Entzi argues because he was on probation while in prison, his maximum probationary period has expired and his current probationary status should be terminated.

[¶3]In Davis v. State, 2001 ND 85, ¶ 7, 625 N.W.2d 855, this Court held “a trial court may require a defendant to successfully complete a sex offender treatment program while in prison as a prior condition of probation.”  Further, this Court held where the district court’s judgment is unambiguous and makes it clear the defendant is required to complete the treatment program as a prior condition to probation and the defendant does not complete the program before release from prison, the defendant has willfully violated his probation.  Id. at ¶¶ 7-8.  The Criminal Judgment and Commitment entered against Entzi in the district court clearly required Entzi to complete a sex offender treatment program while in prison as a prior condition of probation and clearly states his probationary period was to begin after his release from prison.  Davis v. State, 2001 ND 85, 625 N.W.2d 855,  is dispositive of this appeal.

We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6) and (7).

[¶4]Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Dale V. Sandstrom

Daniel J. Crothers

Mary Muehlen Maring

Carol Ronning Kapsner
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
10-QSB FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1999 FOR DBS INDUSTRIES, INC. AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.  
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                 MAR-31-1999  
<CASH>                                       9,306,274             
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0 
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             9,364,365
<PP&E>                                          65,516 
<DEPRECIATION>                                  45,738
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,576,992
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          637,296      
<BONDS>                                              0 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0 
<COMMON>                                         5,023
<OTHER-SE>                                  11,934,673
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,576,992    
<SALES>                                              0 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,118,643
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0       
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 12,369
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (1,106,274)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (1,106,274)   
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.11) 
        


</TABLE>