alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 116
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 116 appear by USCG-2008-0179, 73 FR 35012, June 19, 2008 and USCG-2010-0351, 75 FR 49410, Aug. 13, 2010.

§ 116.01 General. ( a ) All bridges are obstructions to navigation and are tolerated only as long as they serve the needs of land transportation while allowing for the reasonable needs of navigation.
( b ) This part describes the general procedures by which the U.S. Coast Guard determines a bridge to be an unreasonable obstruction to navigation and issues an Order to Alter under the authority of the following statutes, as appropriate: Section 18 of the Rivers and Harbors Appropriations Act of 1899, 33 U.S.C. 502; Section 4 of the Bridge Act of 1906, 33 U.S.C. 494; or the Truman-Hobbs Act of 1940, as amended, 33 U.S.C. 511-524.
( c ) A bridge constructed across a navigable water of the United States shall not unreasonably obstruct the free navigation of the water over which it was constructed, either due to insufficient height or width of the navigation span, or because of difficulty in passing through the draw opening. If any bridge unreasonably obstructs navigation, the Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard, will order the alteration of that bridge. Alterations may include structural changes, replacement, or removal of the bridge.
( d ) Whenever the Coast Guard has good reason to believe that a bridge across any of the navigable waters of the United States is an unreasonable obstruction to navigation, the Coast Guard will give notice to the owner of the bridge and other interested parties, and hold a public meeting at which the interested parties will have a full opportunity to be heard and to provide information on the question of whether alterations to the bridge are necessary and, if so, the extent of alterations needed.
( e ) If the Coast Guard determines that alterations to a bridge are necessary, the Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard, will issue to the bridge owner an Order to Alter containing details of the alterations necessary to render navigation through or under the bridge reasonably free, easy, and unobstructed. ( 1 ) In the case of a railroad or publicly owned highway bridge, an Order to Alter is issued to the bridge owner under the provisions of the Truman-Hobbs Act (33 U.S.C. 511 *et seq.*). In ordering these alterations, the Coast Guard will give due regard to the necessities of free and unobstructed navigation and of rail and highway traffic. For alterations to bridges governed by the Truman-Hobbs Act, the Coast Guard must approve general plans, specifications, and contracts for the alteration project, as well as approving the apportionment of the total cost of the alterations between the United States and the bridge owner.
( 2 ) For all other bridges, the Order to Alter will contain the required alterations for the bridge and will prescribe a reasonable time in which to accomplish the required alterations. The bridge owner is responsible for the entire cost of the required alterations.
[CGD 91-063, 60 FR 20902, Apr. 28, 1995, as amended by USCG-2010-0351, 75 FR 49410, Aug. 13, 2010]
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION OF THE PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d) (SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT)
                                  CERTIFICATION

                         I, Levi Mochkin, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Avenue Group, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Avenue Group,
Inc. as of, and for the periods presented in this report.

4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)), for
Avenue Group, Inc. and have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to Avenue Group, Inc., including its consolidated
subsidiary, is made known to us by others within the entity, particularly during
the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of Avenue Group, Inc.'s disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) Disclosed in this report any changes in Avenue Group Inc.'s internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during Avenue Group Inc.'s fourth fiscal
quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, Avenue Group, Inc.'s internal control over financial reporting: and

5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to Avenue Group, Inc.'s auditors and the audit committee of
Avenue Group, Inc.'s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect Avenue Group, Inc.'s ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in Avenue Group, Inc.'s internal control
over financial reporting.

                                 April 17, 2006





/s/ Levi Mochkin
-----------------------------------------
Levi Mochkin
Chief Executive Officer and President and
Principal Financial Officer
# ToC

# A-1 sel info by St

&"Arial Rounded MT Bold,Bold"&14Table A-1: Selected Information by State for FY 2011	

&"Arial Narrow,Regular"Table A-1: p. &P	

# Case-Complaint related

&"Arial Rounded MT Bold,Bold"&14Table A-1: Selected Information by State for FY 2011	

&"Arial Narrow,Regular"Table A-1: p. &P	

# Entities, Funds, Staff related

&"Arial Rounded MT Bold,Bold"&14Table A-1: Selected Information by State for FY 2011	

&"Arial Narrow,Regular"Table A-1: p. &P	

# Facilities, Beds and Visits

&"Arial Rounded MT Bold,Bold"&14Table A-1: Selected Information by State for FY 2011	

&"Arial Narrow,Regular"Table A-1: p. &P	

# A-1 Sel Info by Region

&"Arial Rounded MT Bold,Bold"&14Table A-1: Selected Information by Region for FY 2011	

&"Arial Narrow,Regular"Table A-1: p. &P	

# Case-Complaint related by Regn

&"Arial Rounded MT Bold,Bold"&14Table A-1: Selected Information by Region for FY 2011	

&"Arial Narrow,Regular"Table A-1: p. &P	

# Entities, Funds, Staff by Regn

&"Arial Rounded MT Bold,Bold"&14Table A-1: Selected Information by Region for FY 2011	

&"Arial Narrow,Regular"Table A-1: p. &P	

# Facilities, Beds&Visits by Regn

&"Arial Rounded MT Bold,Bold"&14Table A-1: Selected Information by Region for FY 2011	

&"Arial Narrow,Regular"Table A-1: p. &P
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

FRANCISCO CABRERA,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

 v.

JAMES YEATS, Warden,

 Respondent - Appellee.

No. 10-55529

D.C. No. 3:09-cv-01330-H-PCL

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

Marilyn L. Huff, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 5, 2011** 

Before: B. FLETCHER, CLIFTON, and BEA, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Francisco Cabrera appeals pro se from the district

court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.

FILED

APR 11 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 10-55529

Cabrera contends that his right to due process was violated when the district

attorney refiled a rape charge after a magistrate judge had determined there was no

probable cause to support the charge. Cabrera’s challenge appears to relate to the

California Court of Appeal’s application of state law, and therefore is not

cognizable on federal habeas review. See 28 U.S.C. §2254(a); see also Estelle v.

McGuire, 502 U.S. 62, 67 (1991). 

To the extent Cabrera raises a cognizable due process claim, the claim fails

because Cabrera received notice of the charges and sufficient evidence supports his

conviction. See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979); see also De Anda v. City

of Long Beach, 7 F.3d 1418, 1422 (9th Cir. 1993) (stating that a dismissal at a

preliminary hearing is not a final determination of the lack of probable cause). 

Accordingly, the state court’s rejection of his claim was not contrary to, or an

unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, nor was it based on an

unreasonable determination of facts in light of the evidence presented in the state

court proceeding. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d).

We construe appellant’s additional arguments as a motion to expand the

certificate of appealability. So construed, the motion is denied. See 9th Cir. R. 

22-1(e); see also Hiivala v. Wood, 195 F.3d 1098, 1104-05 (9th Cir. 1999) (per

curiam).
3 10-55529

Cabrera’s motion for appointment of counsel is denied. 

AFFIRMED.
###### Editorial Note on Part 117

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 117 appear by USCG-1998-3799, 63 FR 35529, June 30, 1998.

#### § 117.989 Trinity River.

The draws of the Union Pacific Railroad bridges, mile 41.4 at Liberty, mile 54.8 at Kenefick, mile 117.3 at Goodrich, mile 181.8 at Riverside, and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad bridge, mile 96.2 at Romayor, need not be opened for the passage of vessels.

[USCG-1998-3799, 63 FR 35527, June 30, 1998]
III 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 546 

Designating May 2008 as ‘‘National Physical Fitness and Sports Month’’ 

and the week of May 1 through May 7, 2008, as ‘‘National Physical 

Education and Sports Week’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 1, 2008 

Mr. THUNE (for himself and Mr. WYDEN) submitted the following resolution; 

which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Designating May 2008 as ‘‘National Physical Fitness and 

Sports Month’’ and the week of May 1 through May 

7, 2008, as ‘‘National Physical Education and Sports 

Week’’. 

Whereas regular physical activity helps increase endurance, 

strengthen bones and muscles, control weight, and reduce 

anxiety and stress, and may improve blood pressure and 

cholesterol levels; 

Whereas about 2⁄3 of young people in the ninth through 12th 

grades do not engage in recommended levels of physical 

activity, and daily participation in high school physical 

education classes has declined over the last 7 years; 


erowe on PRODPC61 with BILLS
2 

•SRES 546 ATS 

Whereas 39 percent of adults report they are not physically 

active, and only 3 in 10 adults engage in the recommended amount of physical activity; 

Whereas, in 2004, more than 9,000,000 children and adolescents in the United States between the ages of 6 and 19 

were considered overweight; 

Whereas obesity and inactivity are 2 major risk factors for 

developing type 2 diabetes, a disease that affects millions 

of people in the United States; 

Whereas many chronic diseases may be prevented by living a 

healthy lifestyle that includes regular physical activity 

and a balanced diet; 

Whereas, according to the Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention, the American Heart Association, and the 

American College of Sports Medicine, minimum physical 

activity for adults consists of moderate activity for 30 

minutes 5 days a week or vigorous activity for 20 minutes 3 days a week; 

Whereas, according to a 1996 report by the Surgeon General, 

positive experiences with physical activity at a young age 

help to lay the foundation for being active throughout 

life; 

Whereas the President’s Council on Physical Fitness and 

Sports promotes regular physical activity to achieve and 

maintain good health and to prevent chronic disease and 

offers motivational tools through the President’s Challenge program for people of all ages to track physical activity; and 

Whereas the month of May has been recognized since 1983 

as National Physical Fitness and Sports Month to encourage physical fitness and activity and to promote 


erowe on PRODPC61 with BILLS
3 

•SRES 546 ATS 

health in children and adults of all ages: Now, therefore, 

be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) designates— 

3 (A) May 2008 as ‘‘National Physical Fit4 ness and Sports Month’’; and 

5 (B) the week of May 1 through May 7, 

6 2008, as ‘‘National Physical Education and 

7 Sports Week’’; and 

8 (2) encourages the people of the United States 

9 to observe the month and the week with appropriate 

10 ceremonies and activities. 

Æ 


erowe on PRODPC61 with BILLS
§ 158.190 Appeals. ( a ) Any person directly affected by an action taken under this part may request reconsideration by the Coast Guard officer responsible for that action.
( b ) Except as provided under paragraph (e) of this section, the person affected who is not satisfied with a ruling after having it reconsidered under paragraph (a) of this section may— ( 1 ) Appeal that ruling in writing within 30 days after the ruling to the Coast Guard District Commander of the district in which the action was taken; and
( 2 ) Supply supporting documentation and evidence that the appellant wishes to have considered.
( c ) The District Commander issues a ruling after reviewing the appeal submitted under paragraph (b) of this section. Except as provided under paragraph (e) of this section, the person affected who is not satisfied with this ruling may— ( 1 ) Appeal that ruling in writing within 30 days after the ruling to the Commandant (CG-5P), Attn: Deputy for Operations Policy and Capabilities, U.S. Coast Guard Stop 7501, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20593-7501; and
( 2 ) Supply supporting documentation and evidence that the appellant wishes to have considered.
( d ) After reviewing the appeal submitted under paragraph (c) of this section, the Assistant Commandant for Marine Safety, Security and Environmental Protection issues a ruling which is final agency action.
( e ) If the delay in presenting a written appeal has an adverse impact on the operations of the appellant, the appeal under paragraph (b) or (c) of this section— ( 1 ) May be presented orally; and
( 2 ) Must be submitted in writing within five days after the oral presentation— ( i ) With the basis for the appeal and a summary of the material presented orally; and
( ii ) To the same Coast Guard official who heard the oral presentation.
[CGD 85-010, 52 FR 7761, Mar. 12, 1987, as amended by CGD 96-026, 61 FR 33668, June 28, 1996; CGD 97-023, 62 FR 33364, June 19, 1997; USCG-2002-12471, 67 FR 41333, June 18, 2002; USCG-2010-0351, 75 FR 36286, June 25, 2010; USCG-2014-0410, 79 FR 38439, July 7, 2014]
§ 136.215 Proof. ( a ) In addition to the requirements of subparts A and B of this part, a claimant must establish— ( 1 ) An ownership or leasehold interest in the property;
( 2 ) That the property was injured or destroyed;
( 3 ) The cost of repair or replacement; and
( 4 ) The value of the property both before and after injury occurred.
( b ) In addition, for each claim for economic loss resulting from destruction of real or personal property, the claimant must establish— ( 1 ) That the property was not available for use and, if it had been, the value of that use;
( 2 ) Whether or not substitute property was available and, if used, the costs thereof; and
( 3 ) That the economic loss claimed was incurred as the result of the injury to or destruction of the property.
MAHMOAD ABDAH, et al., P e ti ti one r s,
v. BARACK

H. OBAMA, et al.,

Re spo nde nt s. UNITED STAT ES DIS TRICT COURT F OR THE D ISTRIC T OFCO LU M BIA

Ci vi l A cti on 04 -01 25 4 (H HK)

OR DE R Be fore the cour

t is respondents’ “ motion for leave to amend fa ctual re turns for I SNs 032, 037, and 041 to include a dditional declar ations and new ly discovere d inculpatory

evidenc e” [#475] . Upon consider ation of the motion, the opposition thereto, and the r ecor d of this case , the court c oncludes that the motion should be grante d. Acc ording ly , it is this 11 day of May 2009, hereby th OR DE RE D that responde nts’ motion for leave to amend fa ctual re turns for I SNs 032, 037, and 041 [#475] is GRANTED. The fac tual returns f or I SNs 032, 037, and 041 are here by amende d to include the exhibits as set for th in Ex hibit A to respondents’ motion, copies of whic h
are included in the cla ssified supplement to responde nts’ motion.

Henr y H. Kenne dy , J r. Un i t edS t at es Di s tri ctJ u d ge
EXHIBIT 23.1

               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

      We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements (Form S-8 File Numbers 333-40292 and 333-49090) pertaining to the
2000 Employee Stock Purchase Plan; the 2000 Stock Plan; and the 1999 Stock
Option Plan (the "Plans") of inSilicon Corporation of our report dated October
17, 2000, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of
inSilicon Corporation included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year
ended September 30, 2000.


                                                           /S/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP

San Jose, California
December 18, 2000
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350**

In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of EpicBancorp for the year ended December 31, 2006, I, Michael Moulton, ChiefFinancial Officer of Epic Bancorp, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that:

| (1)    | such Annual Report on Form 10-K of Epic Bancorp for the year endedDecember 31, 2006, fully complies with the requirements of section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and,                     |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    |
| (2)    | the information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K of EpicBancorp for the year ended December 31, 2006, fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of EpicBancorp. |

| Dated: March 29, 2007 | /s/ MICHAEL MOULTON      |
|-----------------------|-------------------------------|
|                  |                               |
|                  | Michael Moulton               |
|                  | Chief Financial Officer       |
|                  | (Principal Financial Officer) |
```

[House Report 111-24]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

111th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                     111-24

======================================================================

 
   WAIVING A REQUIREMENT OF CLAUSE 6(a) OF RULE XIII WITH RESPECT TO 
  CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN RESOLUTIONS REPORTED FROM THE COMMITTEE ON 
                                 RULES

                                _______
                                

   March 5, 2009.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

   Mr. McGovern, from the Committee on Rules submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                       [To accompany H. Res. 218]

    The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration 
House Resolution 218, by a non-record vote, report the same to 
the House with the recommendation that the resolution be 
adopted.

                SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

    The resolution waives clause 6(a) of rule XIII (requiring a 
two-thirds vote to consider a rule on the same day it is 
reported from the Rules Committee) against certain resolutions 
reported from the Rules Committee. The rule applies the waiver 
to any resolution reported on the legislative day of March 6, 
2009, providing for consideration or disposition of any measure 
making appropriations for the fiscal year 2009, and for other 
purposes.

                                  

```
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

March 11, 2010 

s0303 

Order 

 

March 11, 2010 

139614 & (74) 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 139614 

 COA: 282144 

Berrien CC: 2005-401979-FH 

EDWARD PINKNEY, 

 Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 14, 2009 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. The motion for 

miscellaneous relief is GRANTED.
#### Carey *et al. v.*Fowler *et al.*

Submitted July 18,

Decided December 20, 1906.

Complaint for land. Before Judge Lewis. Greene superior court.. December 27, 1905.

*James B. & Noel P.*Parle, for plaintiffs in error.

*James*Davison, contra.

Atkinson, J.

This was an action for the recovery of land. There was no dispute as to the law applicable to the facts of the ease. The controversy was as to what were the facts. The charges complained of as being not appropriate to the ease were not erroneous for this reason. When the excerpts from the charge which are assigned as error are read in the light of the entire charge and all of the evidence, if any error at all was committed, the error was not prejudicial to the losing party. The evidence though conflicting authorized a verdict in favor of the plaintiffs, and no sufficient reason has been shown for reversing the judgment.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
AVS

Quality Management

System

Title: Domestic New Action Wor1tsheel with S8

QPM#

AIR-ANM-030-F7

Date: December 17, 2006

Revision

1

Record of Contacts

FDMS Do,k" No. PAA.,&oiO.- U56

With whom outside the FAA has this proposal been discussed (e.g., ATA. RAA, ALPA, etc.)?

O~anil.lltiolJ Pe~o ContaclW Date

Bocin~ UrtH:e Shull 10/1:-/07

AT,\ J~ While 61121(1!'l

UNCONTROLLED COPY WHEN DOWNLOADED

Chedl the Master USl to Verify Thai This iSlhe Correct RevIsion Before Use