alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1227.8 Posting of final suspension orders. ( a ) *Required posting.* FHFA will publish on its Web site all final suspension orders issued by FHFA on the effective date of the order.
( b ) *Content of posting.* Each posting on FHFA's Web site shall include: ( 1 ) The full name (where available) of each suspended person and any affiliates thereof subject to the final suspension order, in alphabetical order;
( 2 ) A description of the time period for which the suspension applies; and
( 3 ) A copy of each final suspension order applicable to the person and any affiliates thereof.
( c ) *Removal of names.* FHFA will remove from the Web site all references to the suspension of a person and any affiliates thereof at such time as the suspension expires or is otherwise vacated.
#### § 1403.4 Times, places, and requirements for identification of individuals making requests.

The individual making written requests for information or records ordinarily will not be required to verify that person's identity. The signature upon such requests shall be deemed to be a certification by the requester that he or she is the individual to whom the record pertains, or the parent of a minor, or the duly appointed legal guardian of the individual to whom the record pertains. The Privacy Act Officer, however, may require such additional verification of identity in any instance in which the Privacy Act Officer deems it advisable.
Exhibit 99

            CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
               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 IGENE Biotechnology, Inc. (the "Company")
Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB for the period  ended  September
30, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the  date  hereof (the "Report"), I, Edward J. Weisberger,  Chief
Financial  Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18  U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

          (1). The Report fully complies with the requirements of
          Section  13(a) or 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: November 14, 2002          By:  /s/EDWARD J. WEISBERGER
                                      ___________________________
                                         EDWARD J. WEISBERGER
                                         Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE>           5
<LEGEND>
                    The Schedule contains summary financial 
                    information extracted from the financial
                    statements for Prudential Securities Aggressive
                    Growth Fund LP and is qualified in its entirety 
                    by reference to such financial statements
</LEGEND>

<RESTATED>          

<CIK>               0000899174
<NAME>              Prudential Securities Aggressive Growth Fund LP
<MULTIPLIER>        1

<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               Dec-31-1996

<PERIOD-START>                  Jan-1-1996

<PERIOD-END>                    Dec-31-1996

<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-Mos

<CASH>                          2,303,638

<SECURITIES>                    7,445,540

<RECEIVABLES>                   5,157

<ALLOWANCES>                    0

<INVENTORY>                     0

<CURRENT-ASSETS>                9,754,335

<PP&E>                          0

<DEPRECIATION>                  0

<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  9,754,335

<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           772,174

<BONDS>                         0

<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0

<PREFERRED>                     0

<COMMON>                        0

<OTHER-SE>                      8,982,161

<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    9,754,335

<SALES>                         0

<TOTAL-REVENUES>                1,652,534

<CGS>                           0

<TOTAL-COSTS>                   0

<OTHER-EXPENSES>                1,252,752

<LOSS-PROVISION>                0

<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              0

<INCOME-PRETAX>                 0

<INCOME-TAX>                    0

<INCOME-CONTINUING>             0

<DISCONTINUED>                  0

<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0

<CHANGES>                       0

<NET-INCOME>                    399,782

<EPS-PRIMARY>                   3.40

<EPS-DILUTED>                   0


</TABLE>
#### § 42.15 Ex parte contacts.

No party or person (except employees of the ALJ's office) shall communicate in any way with the ALJ on any matter at issue in a case, unless on notice and opportunity for all parties to participate. This provision does not prohibit a person or party from inquiring about the status of a case or asking routine questions concerning administrative functions or procedures.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>          5
<MULTIPLIER>       1
Primary and fully-diluted loss per share have not been presented
since the effect of comon stock equivalents is anti-dilutive
       
<S>                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>      9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>  DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>     JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>       SEP-30-1996
<CASH>             35,975
<SECURITIES>       0
<RECEIVABLES>      47,509
<ALLOWANCES>       0
<INVENTORY>        0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>    91,446 
<PP&E>             286,500
<DEPRECIATION>     261,147
<TOTAL-ASSETS>     127,399
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>   887,256
<BONDS>            1,500,000
<COMMON>           186,045
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>   470,247
<PREFERRED>          1,875
<OTHER-SE>       (2,918,024)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY> 127,399
<SALES>            40,315
<TOTAL-REVENUES>  104,473
<CGS>              22,310 
<TOTAL-COSTS>     490,815
<OTHER-EXPENSES>        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>114,439
<INCOME-PRETAX>  (522,985)
<INCOME-TAX>            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>(522,985)
<DISCONTINUED>          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>         0
<CHANGES>               0
<NET-INCOME>     (522,985)
<EPS-PRIMARY>        (.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>           0
        

</TABLE>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v.

COTY TRAVIS WATERS,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 21

- 10193

D.C. No. 2:14

- cr

- 00098

- SRB

- 1

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona Susan R. Bolton, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 1 4 , 202 3 * *

Before: FERNANDEZ, FRIEDLAND, and H.A. THOMAS, Circuit Judges

.
Coty Travis Waters appeals from the district court’s order denying his

motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). We have

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Reviewing for abuse of discretion, see United

States v. Keller , 2 F.4th 1278, 1281 ( 9th Cir. 2021), we affirm.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

FEB 22 2023

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 21

- 10193

Waters contends that the district court improperly treat ed U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13

as binding, in contravention of this court’s opinion in United States v. Aruda , 993

F.3d 797, 802 ( 9th Cir. 2021), when determining that he continued to pose a danger

to the community. We need not decide this issue because any error was harmless

in light of the district court’s conclusion that the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors did

not support release. See United States v. Wright , 46 F.

. 4th 938, 94 4

- 48 (9th Cir.

2022) (erroneous application of § 1B1.13 is harmless if the district court’s analysis

of the § 3553(a) factors independently supports the denial of compassionate

release). Contrary to Waters’s argument, the dist rict court did not abuse its

discretion in concluding that the § 3553(a) factors, particularly the seriousness of

the offense, did not favor compassionate release. See Keller , 2 F.4th at 1284

( finding no abuse of discretion in the district court’s denial of compassionate

release under § 3553(a) after noting “the deference we must afford the district

court when it makes these discretionary decisions”). Waters’s contention that the

district court should have given greater weight to his mitigating arguments and the

unanticipated harshness of having to serve his sentence during a pandemic is

unavailing. See United States v. Gutierrez

- Sanchez , 587 F.3d 904, 908 (9th Cir.

2009) (“The weight to be given the various factors in a particular case is for the

discret ion of the district court.”).

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 99.14

                           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 The Entity,  Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the  "Report").  I, Larry Carr,
President and CFO of the company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 USC Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, that to the
best of my knowledge and belief.

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

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


                                         /s/ Larry Carr
                                         --------------------------------
                                         Larry Carr, President and CFO

Dated:  2/26/03
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

172 KA 10-01480
PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., FAHEY, PERADOTTO, CARNI, AND LINDLEY, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

KADEEM R. HARRIS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (KRISTIN M. PREVE OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

FRANK A. SEDITA, III, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BUFFALO (ASHLEY R. SMALL OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Erie County Court (Michael F. Pietruszka, J.), rendered May 17, 2010. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the first degree.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of robbery in the first degree (Penal Law § 160.15 [2]). Contrary to defendant’s contention, we conclude that he knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waived his right to appeal as a condition of the plea ( see generally People v Lopez , 6 NY3d 248, 256). “County Court engage[d] the defendant in an adequate colloquy to ensure that the waiver of the right to appeal was a knowing and voluntary choice” ( People v James , 71 AD3d 1465, 1465 [internal quotation marks omitted]), and the record establishes that he “understood that the right to appeal is separate and distinct from those rights automatically forfeited upon a plea of guilty” ( Lopez , 6 NY3d at 256). Contrary to the further contention of defendant, his “monosyllabic affirmative responses to questioning by [the c]ourt do not render his [waiver] unknowing and involuntary” ( People v Dunham
, 83 AD3d 1423, 1424, lv denied 17 NY3d 794). Defendant’s valid waiver of the right to appeal encompasses his challenge to the severity of the sentence ( see Lopez , 6 NY3d at 255-256; People v Gordon , 89 AD3d 1466). Finally, to the extent that defendant’s contention that he was denied effective assistance of counsel survives his guilty plea and valid waiver of the right to appeal ( see People v Jackson , 85 AD3d 1697, 1699, lv denied 17 NY3d 817), we conclude that it lacks merit ( see generally People v Ford , 86 NY2d 397, 404).

Entered: April 27, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
Exhibit 4.49












ADDENDUM NO 6


to


MASTER MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT dated February 7th, 2008 between Euroseas Ltd and Eurobulk Ltd







This Addendum is made as of February 4th 2014 between Euroseas Ltd. (the "Company"), in its own capacity and as agent for each of its vessel owning subsidiaries identified in Schedule A hereto together with any additional subsidiaries that may acquire vessels in the future (the "Subsidiaries") and Eurobulk Ltd. (the "Manager").







REMUNERATION







Daily management fees were kept at Euro 685/day/vessel (including the 5% discount applied when the numbers of vessels wholly of partly owned by Euroseas and managed by Eurobulk exceeds 20; else the daily management fee per vessel is Euro 720); while executive services fees increases to US$ 2,000,000. As previously agreed, daily management fees for vessels in lay-up are set at 50% of the fees when vessel is in operation, i.e. Euro 342.50 /day/vessel (or, Euro 360 /day/vessel in absence of the 5% discount); daily management fees for vessels under construction start being paid from the later of the day that vessel construction commences (i.e. steel cutting), or the moment the newbuilding contract is acquired (in case of contract re-sales).







Master Management Agreement was renewed for a five year term starting January 1, 2014. The term of the individual vessel management agreements will coincide with the term of the Master Management Agreement as set herein.







For the avoidance of doubt, it is mentioned that whilst this agreement is in place, management fees of all subsidiary shipowning companies are as specified in the Master Management Agreement as hereby amended.







IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Addendum to the Management Agreement as of the date first written above.

















	
 

	
Euroseas Ltd.


	
 

	
 


	
 

	
 


	
 

	
By:

	
/s/ Aristides J. Pittas

	
 


	
 

	
Name:

	
Aristides J. Pittas

	
 


	
 

	
Title:

	
CEO

	
 


	
 

	
 

	
 

	
 


	
 

	
 


	
 

	
 


	
 

	
Eurobulk Ltd.


	
 

	
 


	
 

	
 


	
 

	
By:

	
/s/ Nikolaos Pittas

	
 


	
 

	
Name:

	
Nikolaos Pittas

	
 


	
 

	
Title:

	
Director
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen

Kurtis T. Wilder,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 October 31, 2017

a1023

Order 

Clerk

October 31, 2017

152470

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 152470

COA: 321573 

Wayne CC: 10-006933-FC

JAMES ANTHONY TERRELL,

Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/

By order of May 25, 2016, the application for leave to appeal the September 29, 

2015 judgment of the Court of Appeals was held in abeyance pending the decisions in

People v Steanhouse (Docket No. 152849) and People v Masroor (Docket Nos. 152946-

8). On order of the Court, the cases having been decided on July 24, 2017, 500 Mich 453

(2017), the application is again considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of 

granting leave to appeal, we REVERSE that part of the Court of Appeals judgment that 

remands this case to the Wayne Circuit Court for proceedings under People v Lockridge, 

498 Mich 358 (2015). As the parties agree, the Court of Appeals erroneously concluded 

that relief is warranted under Lockridge even where the defendant’s guidelines range was 

not enhanced by judicial fact-finding. See Lockridge, 498 Mich at 394-395. In all other 

respects, leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the remaining 

aspects of the question presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

WILDER, J., did not participate because he was on the Court of Appeals panel.
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2741 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide a wage index 

floor for hospitals and home health agencies located in certain areas 

under the Medicare Program. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 15, 2007 

Ms. SHEA-PORTER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 

Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within 

the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide 

a wage index floor for hospitals and home health agencies 

located in certain areas under the Medicare Program. 

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

3 SECTION 1. FLOOR ON MEDICARE AREA WAGE INDEX FOR 

4 HOSPITALS AND HOME HEALTH AGENCIES 

5 LOCATED IN CERTAIN AREAS. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1886(d)(3)(E) of the So7 cial Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ww(d)(3)(E)) is amend8 ed by adding at the end the following new clause: 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•HR 2741 IH

1 ‘‘(iii) FISCAL YEAR 2007 FLOOR FOR CER2 TAIN AREAS.— 

3 ‘‘(I) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding 

4 clause (i), in no case shall the area wage 

5 index for a hospital located in an area de6 scribed in subclause (II) for discharges oc7 curring on or after October 1, 2007, be 

8 less than the area wage index applicable to 

9 such hospital during fiscal year 2007. 

10 ‘‘(II) AREADESCRIBED.—An area de11 scribed in this subclause is a rural area 

12 where at least 65 percent of the wages 

13 paid by all subsection (d) hospitals located 

14 in such area on October 1, 2006, not tak15 ing into account reclassifications or redes16 ignations under paragraph (8) or (10), is 

17 attributable to wages paid by one hospital. 

18 ‘‘(III) TREATMENT AS RECLASSIFICA19 TION FOR BUDGET NEUTRALITY.—Sub20 clause (I) shall be treated as a decision of 

21 the Medicare Geographic Reclassification 

22 Review Board under paragraph (10).’’. 

23 (b) RURAL FLOOR FOR HOME HEALTH AGENCIES

24 LOCATED IN URBAN AREAS.— 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

3 

•HR 2741 IH

1 (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 1895(b)(4)(C) of 

2 such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395fff(b)(4)(C)) is amended 

3 by adding at the end the following: ‘‘In no case shall 

4 the area wage index for a home health agency lo5 cated in an urban area in New Hampshire be less 

6 than the area wage index for a rural area in such 

7 State.’’. 

8 (2) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made 

9 by paragraph (1) shall apply to payment for episodes 

10 and visits ending on or after January 1, 2008. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
§ 101.3 Procedures. ( a ) *Notice* — ( 1 ) *Submission.* A Federal savings association that had total consolidated assets of $20 billion or less as of December 31, 2017, as reported on the Federal savings association's Consolidated Reports of Condition and Income for December 31, 2017, may make an election to operate as a covered savings association by submitting a notice to the OCC.
( 2 ) *Contents.* The notice shall: ( i ) Be signed by a duly authorized officer of the Federal savings association; and
( ii ) Identify and describe each nonconforming subsidiary, asset, or activity that the Federal savings association operates, holds, or conducts at the time it submits the notice, each of which must be divested, conformed, or discontinued pursuant to § 101.5.
( b ) *Effective date of the election* — ( 1 ) *In general.* An election to operate as a covered savings association shall take effect on the date that is 60 days after the date on which the OCC receives the notice submitted under paragraph (a) of this section.
( 2 ) *Earlier notice.* Notwithstanding paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the OCC may notify a Federal savings association in writing prior to the expiration of 60 days that it is eligible to make an election, and the election shall take effect on the date the OCC so notifies the Federal savings association.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 188 (Wednesday, September 30, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 50220]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-23591]



[[Page 50220]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human 
Development; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Child Health and Human 
Development Special Emphasis Panel; ``The Development of Memory from 
a Comparative Perspective''.
    Date: October 5, 2009.
    Time: 5 p.m. to 6 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Doubletree Hotel Washington, 1515 Rhode Island Ave., NW., 
Washington, DC 20005.
    Contact Person: Norman Chang, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, 
Division of Scientific Review, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National 
Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6100 Executive 
Blvd., Room 5B01, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 496-1485, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#385b5059565f56785559515416565150165f574e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ed8e858c838a83ad808c8481c3838485c38a829b">[email protected]</span></a>.
    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, 
Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 
93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, 
Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National 
Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: September 24, 2009.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. E9-23591 Filed 9-29-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### William W. Genet, Respondent, *v.*Henry Hirschberg, Appellant.

Appeal from an order giving leave to plaintiff to inspect and take a copy of the books of account of the defendant, including his order book, stock book, cash book, journal, ledger and day book.

McKelvey *&*Mattocks, for appellant.

Alfred E. Genet, for respondent.

Schuchman, J.

The object of the inspection is to enable plaintiff to prepare for the trial of the action. Dickie v. Austin, 4 Civ. Pro. 123. The allegations of the petition are admitted. The inspection of defendant’s books is necessary and material to enable plaintiff to establish his cause of action.

Order appealed from affirmed, with costs and disbursements.

Hascall, J., concurs.

Order affirmed, with costs.