alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|   | (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. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date      March 26, 2010 | By:    | /s/ W.      Donald Bell             |   |
|--------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------|--------|
|                     |   | Name: W.      Donald Bell           |   |
|                     |   | Title:      Chief ExecutiveOfficer  |
1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 43935

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

BRANDON LEE STERLING,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2016 Unpublished Opinion No. 584

Filed: June 29, 2016

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada

County. Hon. Jason D. Scott, District Judge. 

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of thirteen years, with a minimum 

period of confinement of three years, for possession of a controlled substance 

with intent to deliver, affirmed. 

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Elizabeth A. Allred, Deputy 

Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney 

General, Boise, for respondent. 

________________________________________________

Before MELANSON, Chief Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge;

and HUSKEY, Judge

________________________________________________

PER CURIAM 

Brandon Lee Sterling pled guilty to possession of a controlled substance with intent to 

deliver. I.C. § 37-2732(a). In exchange for his guilty plea, additional charges were dismissed. 

Both Sterling and the state requested that the district court sentence Sterling to a unified term of 

thirteen years, with a minimum period of confinement of three years. The district court imposed 

the stipulated sentence. Sterling appeals. 
2

Mindful that Sterling received the sentence he asked for, Sterling asserts that his sentence 

is excessive. The doctrine of invited error applies to estop a party from asserting an error when 

his or her own conduct induces the commission of the error. State v. Atkinson, 124 Idaho 816, 

819, 864 P.2d 654, 657 (Ct. App. 1993). One may not complain of errors one has consented to 

or acquiesced in. State v. Caudill, 109 Idaho 222, 226, 706 P.2d 456, 460 (1985); State v. Lee, 

131 Idaho 600, 605, 961 P.2d 1203, 1208 (Ct. App. 1998). In short, invited errors are not 

reversible. State v. Gittins, 129 Idaho 54, 58, 921 P.2d 754, 758 (Ct. App. 1996). This doctrine 

applies to sentencing decisions as well as rulings made during trial. State v. Griffith, 110 Idaho 

613, 614, 716 P.2d 1385, 1386 (Ct. App. 1986). 

Therefore, because Sterling received the sentence he requested, Sterling may not 

complain that the district court abused its discretion. Accordingly, Sterling’s judgment of 

conviction and sentence is affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3288 Received in Senate (RDS)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 3288

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 31, 2003

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
    To amend title XXI of the Social Security Act to make technical 
    corrections with respect to the definition of qualifying State.

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

SECTION 1. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF 
              QUALIFYING STATE UNDER TITLE XXI OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY 
              ACT.

    Effective as if included in the enactment of Public Law 108-74, 
section 2105(g)(2) of the Social Security Act, as added by section 1(b) 
of such Act, is amended--
            (1) by striking ``185'' the first place it appears and 
        inserting ``184'';
            (2) by inserting ``August 1, 1994, or'' before ``July 1, 
        1995''; and
            (3) by inserting before the period at the end the 
        following: ``, or, in the case of a State that had a statewide 
        waiver in effect under section 1115 with respect to title XIX 
        that was first implemented on October 1, 1993, had an income 
        eligibility standard under such waiver for children that was at 
        least 185 percent of the poverty line and on and after July 1, 
        1998, has an income eligibility standard for children under 
        section 1902(a)(10)(A) or a statewide waiver in effect under 
        section 1115 with respect to title XIX that is at least 185 
        percent of the poverty line''.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 20, 2003.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON , D
.C 20460 

# JUL - 5 2011

OFFICE 0'" Mr. Art Graham AIR ,;rlD RAD!A·IO
.... Chairman State ofFlorida Public Service Commission Capital Office Service Center 2540 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0850 Dear Mr. Graham: Thank you for your letter ofMay 12, 2011, requesting an extension ofthe public comment period for the proposed "National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) from Coal- and Oilfired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units and Standards ofPerformance for Fossil-Fuel-Fired Electric Utility, Industrial-Commercial-Institutional, and Small Industrial-Commercial-Institutional Steam Generating Units" (the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards rule), which was published in the Federal Register on May 3, 2011. The proposal identified a public comment period of60 days ; that period would have ended on July 5, 2011. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, however, recently announced an extension ofthe comment period by 30 days to August 4. While we are extending the comment period, we are not seeking to extend the November 16,2011, deadline for signature ofthe final rule, and remain committed to meeting that deadline. The 30-day extension will provide the public with a 140-day period to review the proposal. As you know, interested parties were aware ofthe posting on March 16, 2011, ofthe signed proposal on the EPA's website (http ://www.epa.gov/ttnJatw/utility/utilitypg
.html), along with much ofthe pertinent supporting documentation (including the analyses used in establishing the proposed emission limits and the technical support documents). The proposal was published a little over six weeks later, on May 3 , marking the beginning ofthe formal public comment period. This will provide the public with approximately 140 days to review and provide written comments on the proposed rule and supporting documents. 

### It will also provide at least 60 days for other documentation that was not posted on the website until after the proposed rule was signed. Due to the substantive issues specific to this rulemaking, this comment period is significantly longer than statutorily required
. Again, thank you for your letter. We look forward to the timely receipt ofyour comments. Sincerely,

Gina McCarthy Assistant Administrator
Internel Address IURL) • http I/www epa gov Recycled/Recyclable · Pnnteo Wllh Vegetable 011 Based Inks on 100"" Postcorsumer. Process ChlOrine Free Recycleo Pape
-82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72 -70

 38

 40

 42

 44

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★ ▲ ▲

▲

▲ 500

 1000

 1500

 100

18 12 06 00

07/31

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 31 Jul 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.81 N 76.74 W Meters AGL

★

■

■

■

■

★ ■ ■

■

■

★

●

●

●

●

★ ● ●

●

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

No. 18

- 40089 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
SERVANDO CALLEJA

- SABINO , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:17

- CR

- 514

- 1

Before DENNIS, CLEMENT, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
The attorney appointed to represent Servando Calleja

- Sabino has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Calleja

- Sabino 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

* 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 September 6, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 18-40089 Document: 00514631289 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/06/2018No. 18

- 40089

2 issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the
APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Case: 18-40089 Document: 00514631289 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/06/2018
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6014

KENNETH RAY NEAL, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA; STEPHEN D. MULLER, Superintendent; MICHAEL F. EASLEY, Respondents - Appellees.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., District Judge. (CA-98-458-1) Submitted: April 15, 1999 Decided: April 20, 1999 Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth Ray Neal, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Kenneth Ray Neal, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254(West 1994 & Supp. 1998). 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 acertificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Neal v. Attorney General of North Carolina , No. CA-98-458-1 (M.D.N.C. Dec. 16, 1998). 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
Exhibit 12.1
<TABLE>

               Electronic Retailing Systems International, Inc.
               Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                         (dollar amounts in thousands)
<CAPTION>
                                           Year Ended December 31,
                                          -------------------------
                                          1996        1995        1994
                                          ----        ----        ----
<S>                                       <C>         <C>         <C>
Pre-tax loss from
 continuing operations                    $(9,412)    $(10,868)   $(11,278)
                                          --------    ---------   ---------

Fixed charges:
-------------
Interest expense & amortization               382           291         65

Rentals:
    Buildings - 33%                            93            98         86
    Office and other leased
     equipment - 33%                            11           13          6
                                         --------     ---------   ---------

Total fixed charges                           486           402        157
                                          --------    --------- ---------

Earnings before income taxes,
 minority interest and fixed
 charges                                   (8,926)     (10,466)    (11,121)
                                          --------    ---------   ---------
Ratio of earnings to fixed
 charges(a)                                  --           --          --   
                                          ========    ========= =========

Deficiency of earnings to fixed
 charges                                  $ 9,412     $ 10,868    $ 11,278
                                          ========    ========= =========

</TABLE>

(a)   As a result of losses incurred in the periods presented, the
Company was unable to cover the indicated fixed charges.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3353 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3353

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 525 Main Street in Tarboro, North Carolina, as the ``George Henry 
                     White Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 21, 2003

Mr. Ballance (for himself, Mr. Miller of North Carolina, Mr. Ballenger, 
 Mr. Coble, Mr. Price of North Carolina, Mr. McIntyre, Mr. Watt, Mrs. 
 Myrick, Mr. Burr, Mr. Jones of North Carolina, Mr. Etheridge, and Mr. 
    Hayes) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 525 Main Street in Tarboro, North Carolina, as the ``George Henry 
                     White Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. GEORGE HENRY WHITE POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 525 Main Street in Tarboro, North Carolina, shall be known 
and designated as the ``George Henry White Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the George Henry 
White Post Office Building.
                                 <all>
```
AO 435

(Rev. 04/11)

Administrative Office of the United States Courts FOR COURT USE ONLY

TRANSCRIPT ORDER DUE DATE:

Please Read Instructions:

1. NAME 2. PHONE NUMBER 3. DATE

4. MAILING ADDRESS 5. CITY 6. STATE 7. ZIP CODE

8. CASE NUMBER 9. JUDGE DATES OF PROCEEDINGS

10. FROM 11. TO

12. CASE NAME LOCATION OF PROCEEDINGS

13. CITY 14. STATE

15. ORDER FOR

" APPEAL " CRIMINAL " CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT " BANKRUPTCY

" NON-APPEAL " CIVIL " IN FORMA PAUPERIS " OTHER (Specify)

16. TRANSCRIPT REQUESTED (Specify portion(s) and date(s) of proceeding(s) for which transcript is requested)

PORTIONS DATE(S) PORTION(S) DATE(S)

" VOIR DIRE " TESTIMONY (Specify Witness)

" OPENING STATEMENT (Plaintiff)

" OPENING STATEMENT (Defendant)

" CLOSING ARGUMENT (Plaintiff) " PRE-TRIAL PROCEEDING (Spcy)

" CLOSING ARGUMENT (Defendant)

" OPINION OF COURT

" JURY INSTRUCTIONS " OTHER (Specify)

" SENTENCING

" BAIL HEARING

17. ORDER

CATEGORY

ORIGINAL

(Includes Certified Copy to

Clerk for Records of the Court)

FIRST COPY ADDITIONAL

COPIES NO. OF PAGES ESTIMATE COSTS

ORDINARY

NO. OF COPIES

" "

14-Day

NO. OF COPIES

" "

EXPEDITED

NO. OF COPIES

" "

DAILY

NO. OF COPIES

" "

HOURLY

NO. OF COPIES

" "

REALTIME " "

CERTIFICATION (18. & 19.)

By signing below, I certify that I will pay all charges

(deposit plus additional).

ESTIMATE TOTAL

$ 0.00

18. SIGNATURE PROCESSED BY

19. DATE PHONE NUMBER

TRANSCRIPT TO BE PREPARED BY COURT ADDRESS

DATE BY

ORDER RECEIVED

DEPOSIT PAID DEPOSIT PAID

TRANSCRIPT ORDERED TOTAL CHARGES $ 0.00

TRANSCRIPT RECEIVED LESS DEPOSIT $ 0.00

ORDERING PARTY NOTIFIED

TO PICK UP TRANSCRIPT TOTAL REFUNDED

PARTY RECEIVED TRANSCRIPT TOTAL DUE $ 0.00

DISTRIBUTION: COURT COPY TRANSCRIPTION COPY ORDER RECEIPT ORDER COPY

Carlos R. Rivera-Ortiz (787) 777-8888 12/14/2017

PO Box 364148 San Juan Puerto Rico 00936

17-3283 Judith G. Dein 12/14/2017 12/14/2017

In re: Financial Oversight and Management Board (Commonwealth) Boston Massachusetts

Complete transcript 12/14/17

1

/s/ Carlos R. Rivera-Ortiz

12/14/2017

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:2000 Filed:12/14/17 Entered:12/14/17 17:40:44 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 1
§ 1022.1 Purpose, scope, and model forms and disclosures. ( a ) *Purpose.* The purpose of this part is to implement the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). This part generally applies to persons that obtain and use information about consumers to determine the consumer's eligibility for products, services, or employment, share such information among affiliates, and furnish information to consumer reporting agencies.
( b ) *Scope.* ( 1 ) [Reserved]
( 2 ) *Institutions covered.* ( i ) Except as otherwise provided in this part, this part applies to any person subject to the FCRA except for a person excluded from coverage of this part by section 1029 of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010, title X of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376.
( ii ) For purposes of appendix B to this part, financial institutions as defined in section 509 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (12 U.S.C. 6809), may use the model notices in appendix B to this part to comply with the notice requirement in section 623(a)(7) of the FCRA (15 U.S.C. 1681s-2(a)(7)).
( c ) *Model forms and disclosures* — ( 1 ) *Use.* Appendices D, H, I, K, L, M, and N contain model forms and disclosures. These appendices carry out the directive in FCRA that the Bureau prescribe such model forms and disclosures. Use or distribution of these model forms and disclosures, or substantially similar forms and disclosures, will constitute compliance with any section or subsection of the FCRA requiring that such forms and disclosures be used by or supplied to any person.
( 2 ) *Definition. Substantially similar* means that all information in the Bureau's prescribed model is included in the document that is distributed, and that the document distributed is formatted in a way consistent with the format prescribed by the Bureau. The document that is distributed shall not include anything that interferes with, detracts from, or otherwise undermines the information contained in the Bureau's prescribed model. Until January 1, 2013, the model forms in appendices B, E, F, G, and H to 16 CFR part 698, as those appendices existed as of October 1, 2011, are deemed substantially similar to the corresponding model forms in appendices H, I, K, M, and N to this part, and the model forms in appendix H to 12 CFR part 222, as that appendix existed as of October 1, 2011, are deemed substantially similar to the corresponding model forms in appendix H to this part.
§ 343.30 Prohibited practices. ( a ) *Anticoercion and antitying rules.* You may not engage in any practice that would lead a consumer to believe that an extension of credit, in violation of section 106(b) of the Bank Holding Company Act Amendments of 1970 (12 U.S.C. 1972) in the case of a State nonmember insured bank and a foreign bank having an insured branch, or in violation of section 5(q) of the Home Owners' Loan Act (12 U.S.C. 1464(q)) in the case of a State savings association, is conditional upon either: ( 1 ) The purchase of an insurance product or annuity from the institution or any of its affiliates; or
( 2 ) An agreement by the consumer not to obtain, or a prohibition on the consumer from obtaining, an insurance product or annuity from an unaffiliated entity.
( b ) *Prohibition on misrepresentations generally.* You may not engage in any practice or use any advertisement at any office of, or on behalf of, the institution or a subsidiary of the institution that could mislead any person or otherwise cause a reasonable person to reach an erroneous belief with respect to: ( 1 ) The fact that an insurance product or annuity sold or offered for sale by you or any subsidiary of the institution is not backed by the Federal government or the institution, or the fact that the insurance product or annuity is not insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation;
( 2 ) In the case of an insurance product or annuity that involves investment risk, the fact that there is an investment risk, including the potential that principal may be lost and that the product may decline in value; or
( 3 ) In the case of an institution or subsidiary of the institution at which insurance products or annuities are sold or offered for sale, the fact that: ( i ) The approval of an extension of credit to a consumer by the institution or subsidiary may not be conditioned on the purchase of an insurance product or annuity by the consumer from the institution or a subsidiary of the institution; and
( ii ) The consumer is free to purchase the insurance product or annuity from another source.
( c ) *Prohibition on domestic violence discrimination.* You may not sell or offer for sale, as principal, agent, or broker, any life or health insurance product if the status of the applicant or insured as a victim of domestic violence or as a provider of services to victims of domestic violence is considered as a criterion in any decision with regard to insurance underwriting, pricing, renewal, or scope of coverage of such product, or with regard to the payment of insurance claims on such product, except as required or expressly permitted under State law.
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3351

To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide the same type of vocational 

rehabilitation benefits and services under laws administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs for certain children with spina bifida as 

are currently available to veterans with service-connected disabilities. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 20, 2003

Mr. WALSH introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL

To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide the same 

type of vocational rehabilitation benefits and services 

under laws administered by the Secretary of Veterans 

Affairs for certain children with spina bifida as are currently available to veterans with service-connected disabilities.

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

3 SECTION 1. VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION FOR CHILDREN 

4 WITH SPINA BIFIDA. 

5 Section 1804(c)(1) of title 38, United States Code, 

6 is amended to read as follows: 
2

•HR 3351 IH 

1 ‘‘(c)(1) Subject to paragraph (2), a vocational train2 ing program for a child under this section may include 

3 the services and assistance described in section 3104 of 

4 this title.’’.

Æ