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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                          16,971
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                       3,004,747
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,058,423
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           10,351
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,048,072
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,058,423
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   501
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,223
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (6,722)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (6,722)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (6,722)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.90)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.90)
        

</TABLE>
* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .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. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-40077 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus HUGO ARMANDO CONTRERAS-DEL TORO, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. L-95-CR-52-1

- - - - - - - - - - October 22, 1997 Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and WIENER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Hugo Armando Contreras-Del Toro appeals the district court’s refusal to reduce his criminal history category. Contreras-Del Toro did not pursue a direct appeal of the initial sentencing order, but instead appended his request to the Government’s motion to reduce sentence pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(b), a motion made one year after the original sentencing. The plain language of Rule 35(b) permits sentence reduction only on the Government’s motion where a defendant has rendered substantialNo. 97-40077 -2- assistance after sentencing. United States v. Early , 27 F.3d 140, 141 (5th Cir. 1994). The district court declined to grant the relief Contreras-Del Toro sought. Indeed, the court lacked jurisdiction to consider Contreras-Del Toro’s request to recalculate his criminal history category. See Early , 27 F.3d at 141-42.
AFFIRMED.
§ 1271.36 Administrative expenses. ( a ) *Payment by Banks.* The Banks shall pay all administrative expenses of the Financing Corporation approved pursuant to § 1271.35.
( b ) *Amount.* The Financing Corporation shall determine the amount of administrative expenses each Bank shall pay in the manner provided by section 21(b)(7)(B) of the Bank Act (12 U.S.C. 1441(b)(7)(B)). The Financing Corporation shall bill each Bank for such amount periodically.
( c ) *Adjustments.* The Financing Corporation shall adjust the amount of administrative expenses the Banks are required to pay in any calendar year pursuant to paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, by deducting any funds that remain from the amount paid by the Banks for administrative expenses in the prior calendar year.
#### George HOLLANDER, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alex HOLLANDER, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 372, Docket 28017.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Argued June 4, 1963.

Decided June 17, 1963.

Copal Mintz, New York City, for defendant-appellant.

Morris Pottish, New York City, for plaintiff-appellee.

Before LUMBARD, Chief Judge, CLARK, Circuit Judge, and BARTELS, District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

In an action before Judge Dimock, defendant-appellant was found to have engaged in stock transactions for the joint account of himself and his brother, plaintiff-appellee. Judge Dimock ordered an accounting. When it was submitted, plaintiff thought it inadequate and sought to have defendant held in contempt. Judge Dawson agreed that the accounting was inadequate, but felt that defendant should be given a second chance to comply. When the second accounting was presented, plaintiff again moved to have defendant adjudged in contempt. Judge Bonsai found that defendant still had not complied with Judge Dimock’s order and appointed Frank H. Gordon, Special Master, to conduct a hearing so as to obtain the accounting which defendant persisted in failing to make. The result of these proceedings was a recommendation that defendant be held in contempt. Judge Bonsai accepted the Special Master’s recommendations, directed the defendant to pay $1,379 to plaintiff’s attorney as reasonable compensation and disbursements, together with $3,000 to the Master as fee, *819and further directed a proper accounting on penalty of a $3,000 fine. Defendant now appeals from this judgment.

Plaintiff asks us to reopen the denial of his motion to dismiss the appeal, made by another panel of this court. This, however, we are unwilling to do. See Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-547, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528. The defendant must pay over large sums of money to plaintiff’s attorney and the Special Master, and this order he cannot effectively appeal after the final judgment on the accounting. The issue on the merits is whether the defendant made a bona fide effort to comply with the district court’s mandates. In such a situation, demean- or has crucial importance. Beyond that, defendant’s conduct seems dubious and irresponsible. Thus there is no basis for setting aside the determinations- of two district judges and the Special Master.

Affirmed.
#### § 42.45 Deposit in Treasury of United States.

All amounts collected pursuant to this part shall be deposited as miscellaneous receipts in the Treasury of the United States, except as provided in 31 U.S.C. 3806(b).
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Sanctioning Sudanese Rapid Support Forces Commanders

# 											Sanctioning Sudanese Rapid Support Forces Commanders									

Press Statement

Matthew Miller, Department Spokesperson

May 15, 2024

The United States is today imposing sanctions on two Rapid Support Forces (RSF) commanders, Ali Yagoub Gibril and Osman Mohamed Hamid Mohamed for their role leading RSF operations in Darfur. The RSF military operation to encircle and besiege El Fasher, North Darfur, has endangered the lives of hundreds of thousands of civilians. Attacks by the RSF, the Sudanese Armed Forces and allied forces have caused civilian casualties and must immediately cease, as should the external support for warring parties. All impediments to humanitarian access – at a time when millions are at risk of starvation due to conflict – must be removed.

The Sudanese people demand and deserve peace and a return to civilian government. The United States will continue to use the tools at its disposal to support the peace process and impose costs on those perpetuating the conflict. We stand ready to take additional measures against those individuals and institutions that actively escalate the war – including any offensive actions on El Fasher – commit atrocities, or create barriers to humanitarian access, in violation of international humanitarian law and commitments made in the Jeddah Declaration.

The Department of the Treasury actions today were taken pursuant to Executive Order 14098. For more information on these actions, see Treasury’s press release.

Tags

AfricaBureau of African AffairsDivision for Counter Threat Finance and SanctionsOffice of the SpokespersonSanctionsSudan

Back to Top
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.                  

###### Department of Transportation

###### Surface Transportation Board

          - [STB Ex Parte No. 290 (Sub-No. 5) (2009-4)]

# AGENCY:

Surface Transportation Board.

# ACTION:

Approval of rail cost adjustment factor.

# SUMMARY:

The Board has approved the fourth quarter 2009 rail cost adjustment factor (RCAF) and cost index filed by the Association of American Railroads. The fourth quarter 2009 RCAF (Unadjusted) is 0.996. The fourth quarter 2009 RCAF (Adjusted) is 0.450. The fourth quarter 2009 RCAF-5 is 0.427.

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         October 1, 2009.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Pedro Ramirez, (202) 245-0333. [Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) for the hearing impaired: 1-800-877-8339.]

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Additional information is contained in the Board's decision, which is available on our Web site,                     *http://www.stb.dot.gov*. Copies of the decision may be purchased by contacting the Office of Public Assistance, Governmental Affairs, and Compliance at (202) 245-0235. Assistance for the hearing impaired is available through FIRS at 1-800-877-8339.                

This action will not significantly affect either the quality of the human environment or energy conservation.

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), we conclude that our action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Decided: September 15, 2009.

By the Board, Chairman Elliott, Vice Chairman Nottingham, and Commissioner Mulvey.

Jeffrey Herzig,

Clearance Clerk.

[FR Doc. E9-22743 Filed 9-21-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4915-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     Financial Data Statement for NHP Retirement Housing Partners, I, L.P.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000793730
<NAME>                        NHP Retirement Housing Partners, I, L.P.
<MULTIPLIER>                  1
<CURRENCY>                    U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                  JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                    MAR-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                 1
<CASH>                          5,723,863
<SECURITIES>                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                   15,685
<ALLOWANCES>                    0
<INVENTORY>                     0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                0
<PP&E>                          24,649,166
<DEPRECIATION>                  (5,925,894)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  25,018,752
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           0
<BONDS>                         20,157,826
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0
<PREFERRED>                     0
<COMMON>                        0
<OTHER-SE>                      (9,270,701)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    25,018,752
<SALES>                         0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                1,331,058
<CGS>                           0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   960,249
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                188,479
<LOSS-PROVISION>                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              774,066
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 (591,736)
<INCOME-TAX>                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             0
<DISCONTINUED>                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0
<CHANGES>                       0
<NET-INCOME>                    (591,736)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                   0
<EPS-DILUTED>                   0
        


</TABLE>
§ 240.3 Prohibited transactions. ( a ) *Fraudulent conduct prohibited.* No banking institution or its related persons may, directly or indirectly, in or in connection with any retail forex transaction: ( 1 ) Cheat or defraud or attempt to cheat or defraud any person;
( 2 ) Knowingly make or cause to be made to any person any false report or statement or cause to be entered for any person any false record; or
( 3 ) Knowingly deceive or attempt to deceive any person by any means whatsoever.
( b ) *Acting as counterparty and exercising discretion prohibited.* A banking institution that has authority to cause retail forex transactions to be effected for a retail forex customer without the retail forex customer's specific authorization may not (and an affiliate of such an institution may not) act as the counterparty for any retail forex transaction with that retail forex customer.
In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

BETHANY BLAGA, * 

 * No. 13-654V

 Petitioner, * Special Master Moran

 * 

v. * Filed: February 12, 2016 

 * 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Attorneys’ fees and costs; award in

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * the amount to which respondent does

 * not object. 

 Respondent. * 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 

Amber D. Wilson, Maglio, Christopher & Toale, PA, Sarasota, FL, for petitioner; 

Traci R. Patton, United States Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. 

UNPUBLISHED DECISION ON FEES AND COSTS1

On January 18, 2016, petitioner filed a stipulation of fact concerning final 

attorneys’ fees and costs in the above-captioned matter. Previously, petitioner 

informally submitted a draft application for attorneys’ fees and costs to respondent 

for review. Upon review of petitioner’s application, respondent raised objections 

to certain items. Based on subsequent discussions, petitioner amended her

application to request $75,648.72 for attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by 

petitioner’s counsel. The Court awards this amount.

On September 9, 2013, Bethany Blaga filed a petition for compensation, 

alleging that the influenza (“flu”) vaccine, which she received on or about 

September 21, 2012, caused development of acute demyelinating 

encephalomyelitis (“ADEM”). Petitioner received compensation based upon the 

parties’ stipulation. Decision, issued September 24, 2015. Because petitioner 

 1 The E-Government Act, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and 

Promotion of Electronic Government Services), requires that the Court post this decision on its 

website. Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 18(b), the parties have 14 days to file a motion proposing 

redaction of medical information or other information described in 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4). 

Any redactions ordered by the special master will appear in the document posted on the website. 

 
received compensation, she is entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees and costs. 42 

U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e). 

Petitioner seeks a total of $75,648.72 in attorneys’ fees and costs. 

Additionally, in compliance with General Order No. 9, petitioner states that she did 

not incur any in out-of-pocket litigation expenses while pursuing this claim. 

Respondent has no objection to the amount requested for attorneys’ fees and costs. 

After reviewing the request, the Court awards the following:

A lump sum of $75,648.72, in the form of a check made payable to 

petitioner and petitioner’s attorney, Amber D. Wilson, of Maglio 

Christopher & Toale, PA, for attorneys’ fees and other litigation costs 

available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e).

The Court thanks the parties for their cooperative efforts in resolving this 

matter. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly. 

Any questions may be directed to my law clerk, Shannon Proctor, at (202) 

357-6360. 

 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 

 s/Christian J. Moran

Christian J. Moran

 Special Master

2
Exhibit 32.1


              CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE 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-Q for  the  period  ended
September  30,  2008, as filed with the Securities  and  Exchange
Commission  (the "Report"), I, Stephen F. Hiu, President  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 3, 2008             By: /S/ STEPHEN F. HIU
                                       __________________________
                                           STEPHEN F. HIU
                                           President


A  signed original of this written statement required by  Section
906  has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the
Company  and furnished to the Securities and Exchange  Commission
or its staff upon request.
# C_2022228EN.01000601.xml

| 13.6.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 228/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.6.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 228/6

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

10 June 2022

(2022/C 228/06)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,0578 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 141,69 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4389 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,85048 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,5255 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0404 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 137,70 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 10,1495 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 24,705 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 398,48 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,6053 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,9442 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 18,0116 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4845 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3484 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,3031 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6482 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,4620 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 344,25 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 16,5209 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,0868 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5225 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 393,27 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6564 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 56,101 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | |
| THB | Thai baht | 36,774 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 5,1718 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 20,8285 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 82,3355 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,0578

JPY

Japanese yen

141,69

DKK

Danish krone

7,4389

GBP

Pound sterling

0,85048

SEK

Swedish krona

10,5255

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0404

ISK

Iceland króna

137,70

NOK

Norwegian krone

10,1495

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

24,705

HUF

Hungarian forint

398,48

PLN

Polish zloty

4,6053

RON

Romanian leu

4,9442

TRY

Turkish lira

18,0116

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4845

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3484

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,3031

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6482

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,4620

KRW

South Korean won

1 344,25

ZAR

South African rand

16,5209

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,0868

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5225

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 393,27

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6564

PHP

Philippine peso

56,101

RUB

Russian rouble

THB

Thai baht

36,774

BRL

Brazilian real

5,1718

MXN

Mexican peso

20,8285

INR

Indian rupee

82,3355

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

---
# C_2022088EN.01002301.xml

| 24.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 88/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/23

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

23 February 2022

(2022/C 88/02)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1344 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 130,58 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4388 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,83463 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,5658 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0431 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 141,20 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 10,0335 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 24,473 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 357,25 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,5481 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,9468 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 15,6871 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5592 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4394 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,8529 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6679 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5253 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 350,23 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 17,0508 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,1669 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5362 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 16 270,12 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,7480 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 57,980 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 90,8791 |
| THB | Thai baht | 36,601 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 5,6808 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 22,9079 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 84,6135 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1344

JPY

Japanese yen

130,58

DKK

Danish krone

7,4388

GBP

Pound sterling

0,83463

SEK

Swedish krona

10,5658

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0431

ISK

Iceland króna

141,20

NOK

Norwegian krone

10,0335

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

24,473

HUF

Hungarian forint

357,25

PLN

Polish zloty

4,5481

RON

Romanian leu

4,9468

TRY

Turkish lira

15,6871

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5592

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4394

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,8529

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6679

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5253

KRW

South Korean won

1 350,23

ZAR

South African rand

17,0508

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,1669

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5362

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

16 270,12

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,7480

PHP

Philippine peso

57,980

RUB

Russian rouble

90,8791

THB

Thai baht

36,601

BRL

Brazilian real

5,6808

MXN

Mexican peso

22,9079

INR

Indian rupee

84,6135

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

---
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

447 CA 12-01276 PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., FAHEY, CARNI, WHALEN, AND MARTOCHE, JJ.

CARROWAY LUXURY HOMES, LLC, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,

V ORDER
RICHARD EDWARDS, DOING BUSINESS AS EDWARDS FRAMING & CONTRACTING, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT, ET AL., DEFENDANT.

COSTELLO, COONEY & FEARON PLLC, SYRACUSE (CHRISTOPHER G. TODD OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
BOND, SCHOENECK & KING, PLLC, SYRACUSE (J.P. WRIGHT OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County (John C. Cherundolo, J.), entered October 14, 2011. The order, insofar as appealed from, granted the motion of plaintiff for summary judgment against defendant Richard Edwards, doing business as Edwards Framing & Contracting.
Now, upon reading and filing the stipulation of discontinuance signed by the attorneys for the parties on January 4 and 9, 2013,
It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs upon stipulation.

Entered: April 26, 2013 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court