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

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>



<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                       1,910,134
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,600,887
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,866,001
<PP&E>                                       3,549,124
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,000,610
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,689,210
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        15,217
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,000,610
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,662,465
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,351,937
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,008
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (689,472)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (240,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (449,472)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.30)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.30)


</TABLE>
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
J ustices

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.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk May 24, 2011

h0516 

# Order

May 24, 2011

142392

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 142392 COA: 292508 Kalamazoo CC: 2008-001079-FC JAMES MELVIN MATTHEWS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the November 18, 2010 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

The Board of Directors and Stockholders 

 

Broadwing Corporation: 

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-114964) of BroadwingCorporation of our reports dated March 4, 2006 with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Broadwing Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2005, management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005 and the effectiveness of internalcontrol over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, which reports appear in the December 31, 2005 annual report on Form 10-K of Broadwing Corporation. 

 

/s/: KPMG LLP 

 

Austin, Texas 

 

March 4, 2006
§ 133.45 Operating limitations. In addition to the operating limitations set forth in the approved Rotorcraft Flight Manual, and to any other limitations the Administrator may prescribe, the operator shall establish at least the following limitations and set them forth in the Rotorcraft-Load Combination Flight Manual for rotorcraft-load combination operations: ( a ) The rotorcraft-load combination may be operated only within the weight and center of gravity limitations established in accordance with § 133.43(c).
( b ) The rotorcraft-load combination may not be operated with an external load weight exceeding that used in showing compliance with §§ 133.41 and 133.43.
( c ) The rotorcraft-load combination may not be operated at airspeeds greater than those established in accordance with § 133.41 (b), (c), and (d).
( d ) No person may conduct an external-load operation under this part with a rotorcraft type certificated in the restricted category under § 21.25 of this chapter over a densely populated area, in a congested airway, or near a busy airport where passenger transport operations are conducted.
( e ) The rotorcraft-load combination of Class D may be conducted only in accordance with the following: ( 1 ) The rotorcraft to be used must have been type certificated under transport Category A for the operating weight and provide hover capability with one engine inoperative at that operating weight and altitude.
( 2 ) The rotorcraft must be equipped to allow direct radio intercommunication among required crewmembers.
( 3 ) The personnel lifting device must be FAA approved.
( 4 ) The lifting device must have an emergency release requiring two distinct actions.
[Doc. No. 1529, 29 FR 603, Jan. 24, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 133-1, 30 FR 883, Jan. 28, 1965; Amdt. 133-5, 41 FR 55476, Dec. 20, 1976; Amdt. 133-6, 42 FR 24198, May 12, 1977; Amdt. 133-9, 51 FR 40709, Nov. 7, 1986]
#### Section 17 Objective Classification—Extraordinary Items

96 Extraordinary Items.

Record here material items characterized by their unusual nature and infrequent occurrence. Events or transactions which are material and either unusual or nonrecurring, but not both, shall be recorded in the profit and loss accounts to which they relate and disclosed on BTS Form 41 Schedule P-2 with identification as to their nature and financial effects.

[Amdt. 241-58, 54 FR 5596, Feb. 6, 1989, as amended at 60 FR 66723, Dec. 26, 1995]

97 Income Taxes Applicable to Extraordinary Items.

Record here income taxes allocable to items of income included in profit and loss account 96 Extraordinary Items and income tax assessments that do not constitute ordinary adjustments of a recurrent nature. Records supporting entries to this account shall be maintained with sufficient particularity to identify the nature and gross amount of each extraordinary credit and each extraordinary debit.

[ER-948, 41 FR 12296, Mar. 25, 1976]
#### § 7.1014 Sale of money orders at nonbanking outlets by a national bank.

A national bank may designate bonded agents to sell the bank's money orders at nonbanking outlets. The responsibility of both the bank and its agent should be defined in a written agreement setting forth the duties of both parties and providing for remuneration of the agent. The bank's agents need not report on sales and transmit funds from the nonbanking outlets more frequently than at the end of the third business day following receipt of the funds.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3886 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3886

  To prohibit the use of funds for an explosive nuclear weapons test.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              June 3, 2020

  Mr. Merkley (for Mr. Markey (for himself, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Merkley, 
   Mrs. Gillibrand, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Durbin, Ms. Warren, Mr. Van 
Hollen, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Cardin, Ms. Smith, Ms. Baldwin, Mr. 
Murphy, and Ms. Hirono)) introduced the following bill; which was read 
         twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To prohibit the use of funds for an explosive nuclear weapons test.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Preserving Leadership Against 
Nuclear Explosives Testing Act of 2020'' or the ``PLANET Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR NUCLEAR WEAPONS TEST 
              EXPLOSIONS.

    (a) In General.--None of the funds authorized to be appropriated or 
otherwise made available for fiscal year 2021, or authorized to be 
appropriated or otherwise made available for any fiscal year before 
fiscal year 2021 and available for obligation as of the date of the 
enactment of this Act, may be obligated or expended to conduct or make 
preparations for any explosive nuclear weapons test that produces any 
yield.
    (b) Rule of Construction.--Subsection (a) does not limit nuclear 
stockpile stewardship activities that are consistent with the zero-
yield standard and other requirements under law.
                                 <all>
```
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MARIA JOSEFINA VALLES SANCHEZ; 

FERNANDO MONTES PAVON, 

Petitioners, 

 v. 

MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, Acting 

Attorney General, 

Respondent.

No. 11-73253 

Agency Nos. A096-349-886 

A096-349-887 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted January 11, 2019**

Before: TROTT, SILVERMAN, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

Maria Josefina Valles Sanchez and Fernando Montes Pavon, natives and 

citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ 

(“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 

 

* 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

JAN 15 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 

U.S.C. § 1252. We review for an abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to 

reopen. Bonilla v. Lynch, 840 F.3d 575, 581 (9th Cir. 2016). We grant the petition 

for review and remand.

The BIA abused its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to reopen as 

untimely. With respect to petitioners’ claim that multiple former attorneys 

provided ineffective assistance, the BIA failed to consider petitioners’ contentions 

that the notario and attorney who prepared their 2003 asylum and cancellation of 

removal applications provided false information in the applications and failed to 

solicit information concerning the asylum claim. See Sagaydak v. Gonzales, 405 

F.3d 1035, 1040 (9th Cir. 2005) (holding that the BIA is not free to ignore 

arguments raised by a petitioner). The BIA’s failure to address these contentions 

undermines its grounds for rejecting equitable tolling of the filing deadline because 

the BIA’s analysis relies on dates and other information in those applications that 

petitioners allege were falsely provided due to the ineffective assistance. See 

Bonilla, 840 F.3d at 582 (holding that equitable tolling is available to a petitioner 

who is prevented from filing because of deception, fraud, or error, as long as 

petitioner exercised due diligence in discovering such circumstances).

The BIA further failed to explain its conclusion that petitioners, having 

alleged that the female petitioner was persecuted by a local political figure, and 

was rebuffed when she sought assistance from local authorities, did not present a 
3 

colorable asylum claim. See Lin v. Ashcroft, 377 F.3d 1014, 1027 (9th Cir. 2004) 

(in assessing whether a petitioner was prejudiced by incompetent counsel, this 

court “must consider the underlying merits of the case to come to a tentative 

conclusion as to whether [the petitioner’s] claim, if properly presented, would be 

viable”).

Accordingly, we remand for the BIA to reassess its tolling and prejudice 

determinations.

PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.
#### § 810.0 Authority for issue and sale.

The Federal Financing Bank is authorized under the Federal Financing Bank Act of 1973, to issue publicly, with the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury, obligations having such maturities and bearing such rate or rates of interest as may be determined by the Bank. Pursuant to this authority, Federal Financing Bank bills, referred to herein as “FFB bills,” are offered for sale from time to time and tenders invited therefor, through the Federal Reserve Banks. The FFB bills so offered, the tenders made, and all subsequent transactions therein are subject to the terms and conditions of the public notice offering the bills for sale, this circular, and to the extent not inconsistent with such notice and circular, to Department of the Treasury Circular No. 418, current revision, the regulations governing United States Treasury bills, and all other regulations governing United States securities.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>     5
<MULTIPLIER>     1000
       
<S>                                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>       JUL-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>            JAN-31-1996
<CASH>                       271
<SECURITIES>                    907
<RECEIVABLES>                 40
<ALLOWANCES>                   0
<INVENTORY>                   15
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                  0 
<PP&E>                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                      0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                      5499
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>          0
<BONDS>                        0
<COMMON>                       8646
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>          0
<PREFERRED>                    0
<OTHER-SE>                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     5499
<SALES>                         126
<TOTAL-REVENUES>             397
<CGS>                            57
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   132
<OTHER-EXPENSES>             475
<LOSS-PROVISION>               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                  0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                (175)    
<INCOME-TAX>                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                 0
<DISCONTINUED>                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                0
<CHANGES>                           0
<NET-INCOME>                   (175)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                  (.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                  0
                             

</TABLE>
§ 151.125 Allowable advance planning costs. ( a ) The United States' share of the allowable costs of an advance planning proposal is stated in the advance planning grant agreement, but is not more than 50 percent of the total cost of the necessary and reasonable planning and engineering services.
( b ) The allowable advance planning costs consist of planning and engineering expenses necessarily incurred in effecting the advance planning proposal. Allowable cost items include— ( 1 ) Location surveys, such as preliminary topographic and soil exploration;
( 2 ) Site evaluation;
( 3 ) Preliminary engineering, such as stage construction outlines, cost estimates, and cost/benefit evaluation reports;
( 4 ) Contract drawings and specifications;
( 5 ) Testing; and
( 6 ) Incidental costs incurred to accomplish the proposal, that would not have been incurred otherwise.
( c ) To qualify as allowable, the advance planning costs paid or incurred by the sponsor must be— ( 1 ) Reasonably necessary and directly related to the planning or engineering included in the proposal as approved by FAA;
( 2 ) Reasonable in amount; and
( 3 ) Verified by sufficient evidence.
#### §§ 324.39-324.40 [Reserved]
EXHIBIT 99.1

                       Certification of ANTs software inc.
           pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002
                    regarding Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB
                    for the quarter ended September 30, 2002
           ----------------------------------------------------------

     Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a)
and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of
the undersigned officers of ANTs software inc., a Delaware corporation (the
"Company"), does hereby certify that:

     1. The Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended
September 30, 2002 (the "Form 10-QSB") fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

     2. Information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.


Date:       November 14, 2002           By: /s/ Francis K. Ruotolo
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Francis K. Ruotolo, Chairman,
                                           Chief Executive Officer and President


Date:      November 14, 2002            By: /s/ Kenneth Ruotolo
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Kenneth Ruotolo
                                           Chief Financial Officer and Secretary
§ 13.67 Procedures for expedited proceedings. ( a ) When an expedited administrative hearing is requested in accordance with § 13.20(d), the procedures in this subpart will apply except as provided in paragraphs (a)(1) through (7) of this section. ( 1 ) Service and filing of pleadings, motions, and documents must be by overnight delivery, and fax or email. Responses to motions must be filed within 7 days after service of the motion.
( 2 ) Within 3 days after receipt of the request for hearing, the agency must file a copy of the notice of proposed action, which serves as the complaint, to the FAA Hearing Docket.
( 3 ) Within 3 days after receipt of the complaint, the person that requested the hearing must file an answer to the complaint. All allegations in the complaint not specifically denied in the answer are deemed admitted. Failure to file a timely answer, absent a showing of good cause, constitutes withdrawal of the request for hearing.
( 4 ) Within 3 days of the filing of the complaint, the Director of the Office of Adjudication will assign a hearing officer to preside over the matter.
( 5 ) The parties must serve discovery as soon as possible and set time limits for compliance with discovery requests that accommodate the accelerated adjudication schedule set forth in this subpart. The hearing officer will resolve any failure of the parties to agree to a discovery schedule.
( 6 ) The expedited hearing must commence within 40 days after the notice of proposed action was issued.
( 7 ) The hearing officer must issue an oral decision and order dismissing, reversing, modifying, or affirming the notice of proposed action at the close of the hearing. If a notice of appeal is not filed, such order is final with respect to the parties and is not subject to judicial review.
( b ) Any party to the expedited hearing may appeal from the initial decision of the hearing officer to the Administrator by filing a notice of appeal within 3 days after the date on which the decision was issued. The time limitations for the filing of documents for appeals under this section will not be extended by reason of the unavailability of the hearing transcript. ( 1 ) Any appeal to the Administrator under this section must be perfected within 7 days after the date the notice of appeal was filed by filing a brief in support of the appeal. Any reply to the appeal brief must be filed within 7 days after the date the appeal brief was served on that party. The Administrator must issue an order deciding the appeal no later than 80 days after the date the notice of proposed action was issued.
( 2 ) The Administrator's order is immediately effective and constitutes the final agency decision. The Administrator's order may be appealed pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 46110. The filing of an appeal under 49 U.S.C. 46110 does not stay the effectiveness of the Administrator's order.
( c ) At any time after an immediately effective order is issued, the FAA may request the United States Attorney General, or the delegate of the Attorney General, to bring an action for appropriate relief.
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3581

To amend title 28 of the United States Code with respect to venue in 

certain preference proceedings under title 11 of the United States Code 

commenced by the trustee against small businesses. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 21, 2003

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

on the Judiciary 

A BILL

To amend title 28 of the United States Code with respect 

to venue in certain preference proceedings under title 

11 of the United States Code commenced by the trustee 

against small businesses.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Small Business Bank5 ruptcy Venue Relief Act of 2003’’. 
2

•HR 3581 IH 

1 SEC. 2. VENUE IN CERTAIN PREFERENCE PROCEEDINGS 

2 UNDER TITLE 11 OF THE UNITED STATES 

3 CODE AGAINST CREDITORS THAT ARE SMALL 

4 BUSINESSES. 

5 Section 1409(b) of title 28, United States Code, is 

6 amended—

7 (1) by inserting ‘‘(1)’’ after ‘‘(b)’’, 

8 (2) by striking ‘‘case to’’ and inserting the fol9 lowing: 

10 ‘‘case—

11 ‘‘(A) to’’, 

12 (3) by striking ‘‘$5,000 only’’ and inserting the 

13 following: 

14 ‘‘$5,000; or 

15 ‘‘(B) to avoid a transfer under section 547 of 

16 title 11 to or for the benefit of a creditor that is a 

17 small business and that was not an insider at the 

18 time of such transfer, for or on account of an ante19 cedent debt that is not a consumer debt; 

20 only’’, and 

21 (4) by adding at the end the following: 

22 ‘‘(2) For purposes of paragraph (1), the term ‘small 

23 business’ means a person that is engaged in commercial 

24 or business activities and, as determined in the date on 

25 which such proceeding is commenced, has fewer than 25 

26 full-time employees.’’. 
3

•HR 3581 IH 

1 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE; APPLICATION OF AMENDMENTS. 

2 (a) EFFECTIVE DATE.—Except as provided in sub3 section (b), this Act and the amendments made by this 

4 Act shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this 

5 Act. 

6 (b) APPLICATION OF AMENDMENTS.—The amend7 ments made by this Act shall apply only with respect to 

8 cases commenced under title 11 of the United States Code 

9 on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
#### ELWOOD GRISSINGER v. UNITED STATES

[77 C.Cls. 106; 290 U.S. 676]

Petition for writ of certiorari *denied*by Supreme Court October 23, 1933.
§ 1264.146 Limitations. ( a ) The notice of hearing with respect to a claim or statement must be served in the manner specified in § 1264.107 within 6 years after the date on which such claim or statement is made.
( b ) If the defendant fails to file a timely answer, service of a notice under § 1264.109(b) shall be deemed a notice of hearing for purposes of this section.
( c ) The statute of limitations may be extended by agreement of the parties.