alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
This table was generated on 9/7/23.

Rank ID # Committee Amount

1 C00825851 MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN INC. $37,955,202

2 C00834077 NEVER BACK DOWN INC. $33,784,486

3 C00484642 SMP $23,171,854

4 C00825158 OPPORTUNITY MATTERS FUND ACTION $13,034,909

5 C00750182 OPPORTUNITY MATTERS FUND, INC. $12,176,733

6 C00786624 DEMOCRACY PAC II $9,412,601

7 C00805283 FAIR COURTS AMERICA $7,045,974

8 C00571588 RESTORATION PAC $6,199,522

9 C00659011 WITH HONOR FUND, INC. $4,165,543

10 C00756569 WORKER POWER PAC $3,685,050

11 C00627372 UNITE HERE PAC $3,677,825

12 C00487470 CLUB FOR GROWTH ACTION $3,204,831

13 C00489799 PLANNED PARENTHOOD VOTES $3,086,207

14 C00754051 WORKERS VOTE $2,997,835

15 C00530766 WOMEN SPEAK OUT PAC $2,993,082

16 C00799031 UNITED DEMOCRACY PROJECT ('UDP') $2,753,620

17 C00571703 SENATE LEADERSHIP FUND $2,477,652

18 C00681825 LAW ENFORCEMENT FOR A SAFER AMERICA PAC $2,463,656

19 C00490847 WORKING FOR WORKING AMERICANS - FEDERAL $2,393,321

20 C00749671 CITIZENS FOR FREE ENTERPRISE $1,985,853

21 C00631549 FORWARD MAJORITY ACTION $1,840,343

22 C00801803 SOS AMERICA PAC $1,540,848

23 C00752691 ONE FOR ALL COMMITTEE $1,404,441

24 C00763409 ORGANIZING EMPOWERMENT PAC $1,391,838

25 C00831552 AMERICA STRONG AND FREE ACTION, INC. $1,330,822

26 C00838359 AMERICAN BRIDGE RESEARCH FUND $1,300,030

27 C00758938 POLICE COALITION OF AMERICA PAC $1,264,961

28 C00483883 RETIRED AMERICANS PAC $1,186,993

29 C00701888 UNITE THE COUNTRY $1,143,394

30 C00544387 AMERICAN PRINCIPLES PROJECT PAC $1,133,029

31 C00709113 AMERICAN COALITION FOR CRISIS RELIEF PAC $1,128,931

32 C00828533 WORKER POWER PAC FOR GEORGIA $1,030,000

33 C00777185 SAVING ARIZONA PAC $1,009,529

34 C00779595 RSLC PAC $974,346

35 C00568964 LIUNA BUILDING AMERICA $962,735

36 C00839464 COMMITTED TO AMERICA PAC $906,836

37 C00683649 MIND THE GAP, INC $874,588

38 C00710160 AMERICAN ALLIANCE FOR DISABLED CHILDREN PAC $841,323

39 C00688655 EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY VICTORY FUND (EVERYTOWN VICTORY FUND) $841,185

40 C00715433 CONSTITUTIONAL LEADERSHIP PAC $792,487

41 C00774323 POLICE AND TROOPER SUPPORT PAC $777,061

42 C00804856 REPUBLICAN ACCOUNTABILITY PAC $759,903

43 C00802389 GIVEGREEN UNITED ACTION $744,528

44 C00710178 HONORING AMERICAN LAW ENFORCEMENT PAC $739,519

45 C00699801 VETERANS AID PAC $714,969

46 C00523241 SPECIAL OPERATIONS FOR AMERICA $693,384

47 C00836411 SAVE OUR CONSTITUTION PAC $674,765

48 C00685693 CASA IN ACTION PAC $667,235

49 C00489815 NEA ADVOCACY FUND $609,276

50 C00712885 AMERICAN VETERANS INITIATIVE PAC $604,893

January 1 - June 30, 2023

Top 50 Independent Expenditure-Only Political Committees (Super PACs) by Disbursements

PAC Table 12b
§ 801.1 Purpose and authorities. ( a ) These regulations are required by section 110(c) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1980 (HCDA) (42 U.S.C. 5320) and apply only to projects proposed to be funded by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) under the Urban Development Action Grant (UDAG) Program authorized by title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5301). These regulations establish an expedited process for obtaining the comments of the Council specifically for the UDAG program and, except as specifically provided, substitute for the Council's regulations for the “Protection of Historic and Cultural Properties” (36 CFR part 800).
( b ) Section 110(c) of the HCDA of 1980 requires UDAG applicants to: ( 1 ) Identify all properties, if any, which are included in the National Register of Historic Places and which will be affected by the project for which the application is made;
( 2 ) identify all other properties, if any, which will be affected by such project and which, as determined by the applicant, may meet the Criteria established by the Secretary of the Interior for inclusion in the National Register (36 CFR 60.6); and
( 3 ) provide a description of the effect, as determined by the applicant, of the project on properties identified pursuant to (1) and (2). If the applicant determines that such properties are affected, the Act requires that the information developed by the applicant must be forwarded to the appropriate State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) for review and to the Secretary of the Interior for a determination as to whether the affected properties are eligible for inclusion in the National Register.
( c ) Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470), requires the head of any Federal agency with jurisdiction over a Federal, federally assisted or federally licensed undertaking that affects a property included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places to take into account the effect of the undertaking on such property and afford the Council a reasonable opportunity to comment. Under the UDAG program, applicants assume the status of a Federal agency for purposes of complying with section 106.
#### § 101.75 Compliance conflicts.

If compliance with any provision of the DPA and other applicable statutes, this part, or an official action would prevent a person from filling a rated order or from complying with another provision of the DPA and other applicable statutes, this part, or an official action, the person must immediately notify HHS, as specified in § 101.93, for resolution of the conflict.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

KARL D. HUBER,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v. CHRISTOPHER COULTER, individual and official capacity; et al.,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 15

- 55392

D.C. No. 2:12

- cv
- 03293

- GHK

JEM

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California George H. King, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 8, 2017 **

Before: LEAVY, W. FLETCHER, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
Karl D. Huber appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in

his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging false arrest, excessive force, and malicious
prosecution claims

. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de

novo. Newman v

. Co unty of Orange , 457 F

. 3d 991 , 993 ( 9th Cir

. 2006 ) . We

* 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

MAR 21 201 7
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 15

- 55392

affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment on Huber’s false

arrest claim because it would not have been clear to every reasonable officer that
the conduct violated a clearly established right. See Stanton v. Sims , 134 S. Ct. 3, 4
(2013) (police officer entitled to qualified immunity unless the conduct at issue
violated a clearly established constitutional right)

.
The dist rict court properly granted summary judgment on Huber’s

excessive force claim because defendants’ limited use of force during the course of

Huber’s arrest did not viol ate a clearly established right. S ee id

. We therefore do

not consider whether the force used during the arrest violated a constitutional right

. Further, H uber failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether

defendants’ use of handcuff s after Huber ’s arrest was unreasonable

. S ee Arpin v.
Santa Clara Valley Transp. Agency , 261 F.3d 912, 922 (9th Cir. 2001 ) ( finding

summar y judgment proper on an excessive force claim where plaintiff failed to
provide specific facts that the force used by the application of handcuffs was
unreasonable or that she sustained actual injur ies ).
The district court properly granted summary judgment on Huber’s malicious
prosecution claim because Huber failed to rebut the presumption that the3 15

- 55392

prosecutor exercised independent judgment in determining that probable cause

existed. See Newman , 457 F

. 3d at 993

- 95 (plaintiff bears the burden of rebutting
presumption of independent judgment, and “must provide more than an account of
the incident in question that conflicts with the account of the officers involved” ).
We reject as unsupported by the reco rd Huber’s contention that the district

court did not consider his objections to the magistrate judge’s report and

recommendation.

AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit 31.2****Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)****(Chief Financial Officer)****CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**I, Mark J. Flaherty, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Tandy Brands Accessories, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;  b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and  c. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likelyto adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.        Date:  September 23, 2005 /s/ Mark J. Flaherty   Mark J. Flaherty   Chief Financial Officer
Form 5735

(Rev. January 2013) 

Department of the Treasury 

Internal Revenue Service 

American Samoa Economic Development Credit

▶ See the separate instructions. 

▶ Attach to the corporation’s tax return. 

OMB No. 1545-0217 

For calendar year 20 , or other tax year beginning , 20 , and ending , 20 . 

Name Employer identification number 

Caution: The corporation must meet the qualified production activities income requirement (see instructions) to qualify 

for the American Samoa economic development credit. 

1 Enter 60% of qualified compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

2 Enter 15% of the depreciation deduction for short-life qualified tangible property . . . . . . . 2

3 Enter 40% of the depreciation deduction for medium-life qualified tangible property . . . . . . 3

4 Enter 65% of the depreciation deduction for long-life qualified tangible property . . . . . . . 4

5 Tentative credit. Add lines 1 through 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

6 Total U.S. income tax against which credit is allowed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

7 American Samoa economic development credit. Enter the smaller of line 5 or line 6. Enter the

result here and on Form 1120, Schedule J, line 5b, or the corresponding line of other returns (see 

instructions). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the separate instructions. Cat. No. 12090G Form 5735 (Rev. 1-2013)
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Edward D. Peters, Respondent, *v.*Robert B. Adam et al., Constituting the Civil Service Commission of the City of Buffalo, Appellants.

*People ex rel. Peters*v. *Adam,*122 App. Div. 898, affirmed.

(Argued January 7, 1908;

decided January 21, 1908.)

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered *568November 27, 1907, which affirmed an order of Special Term granting a motion for a peremptory writ of mandamus to compel defendants to certify to the payrolls of the relator.

*Samuel F. Morcm*and *Louis F. Desbecl&er*for appellants,

*Simon Fleischma/nn*for respondent.

Order affirmed; no opinion.

Concur: Cüllbn, Ch. J., Gray', Vann, Werner, Willard Bartlett, Hiscock and Chase, JJ.
Editorial Note on Part 1304
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1304 appear at 89 FR 67817, Aug. 21, 2024.

§ 1304.14 Tribal government consultation under the Designation Renewal System for when an Indian Head Start grant is being considered for competition. ( a ) In the case of an Indian Head Start agency determined not to be delivering a high-quality and comprehensive Head Start program, the responsible HHS official will engage in government-to-government consultation with the appropriate Tribal government or governments for the purpose of establishing a plan to improve the quality of the Head Start program operated by the Indian Head Start agency. ( 1 ) The plan will be established and implemented within six months after the responsible HHS official's determination.
( 2 ) Not more than six months after the implementation of that plan, the responsible HHS official will reevaluate the performance of the Indian Head Start agency.
( 3 ) If the Indian Head Start agency is still not delivering a high-quality and comprehensive Head Start program, the responsible HHS official will conduct an open competition to select a grant recipient to provide services for the community currently being served by the Indian Head Start agency.
( b ) A non-Indian Head Start agency will not be eligible to receive a grant to carry out an Indian Head Start program, unless there is no Indian Head Start agency available for designation to carry out an Indian Head Start program.
( c ) A non-Indian Head Start agency may receive a grant to carry out an Indian Head Start program only until such time as an Indian Head Start agency in such community becomes available and is designated pursuant to this part.
[81 FR 61412, Sept. 6, 2016, as amended at 89 FR 67817, Aug. 21, 2024]
Exhibit 31.1





CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER REQUIRED BY RULE 13A-14(a) OF

THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Edward D. Bednarcik, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form 10-K of Lighting Science Group Corporation;
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|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;
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|Date: May 1, 2017 | By:                            | /s/ Edward D. Bednarcik | 
|----------------- | ------------------------------ | ----------------------- | 
|                  |                                |                         | 
|                  | Name: Edward D. Bednarcik      |                        
|                  |                                |                         | 
|                  | Title: Chief Executive Officer |                        
|                  |                                |                         | 
|                  | (Principal Executive Officer)  |
SENA.TE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NINETY-NINTH CONGRESS 

Convened January 3, 1985 

FIRST SESSION { 

SECOND SESSION { 

EXECUTIVE CALENDAR 

Monday, May 6, 1985 

PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF JO-ANNE L. COE, 

SECRETARY OF THE SENATE 

By Gerald A. Hackett, Executive Clerk 
1 

NOMINATIONS 

Calendar Message Nominee, Office, And Predecessor Reported 

No. No. Bv 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

* 100 115 John R. Norton III, of Arizona, to be Apr 4, 85 Mr. Helms, 

Deputy Secretary of Agriculture, vice Committee on Agriculture, 

Richard E. Lyng, resigned. Nutrition, and Forestry, 

without printed report. 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

* 118 1-51 Helmut A. Merklein, of the District of May 1, 85 Mr. McClure, 

Columbia, to be Administrator of the Committee on Energy and 

Energy Information Administration, vice J. Natural Resources, without 

Erich Evered, resigned, to which position printed report. 

he was appomted during the last recess of 

the Senate. 

* 119 157 Theodore J. Garrish, of Vtrginia, to be an Do. 

Assistant Secretary of Energy 

(Congressional, Intergovernmental and 

Pubhc Affatrs), vice Robert C. Odle, Jr., 

resigned. 

* 120 158 J. Michael Farrell, of the District of Do. 

Columbia, to be General Counsel of the 

Department of Energy, vice Theodore J. 

Garnsh. 

* 121 210 Joseph F. Salgado, of California, to be Do. 

Under Secretary of Energy, vice William 

Patnck Collins, resigned. 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

129 188 Herbert M. Rutherford Ill, of Virginia, to May 2, 85 Mr. Thurmond, 

be United States Marshal for the District Committee on the Judiciary, 

of Columbia for the term of four years without printed report 

vice James 0. Golden. 
2 

- Calendar Message Nominee, Office, And Predecessor Reported 

* 

No. No. Bv 

- [NEW REPORTS] 

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE 

UNITED STATES 

144 34 Richard H. Hughes, of Oklahoma, to be a May 3, 85 Mr. Garn, 

Member of the Board of Directors of the Committee on Banking, 

Export-Import Bank of the United States Housing, and Urban Affairs 

for a term expiring January 20, 1987. without printed report. ' 

(Reanoointment) .. *S1gntf1es nominee's commitment to respond to requests to appear and testify before any duly 

constituted committee of the Senate.
Exhibit 32.2
  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 In connection with the Annual Report of iTech Medical, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Annual Report”), I, Wayne D. Cockburn, 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 and belief:
 
 1.           The Annual 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 this Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 Dated: April 15, 2011

/s/  Wayne D. CockburnWayne D. CockburnChief Financial Officer
§ 1355.51 Definitions applicable to Comprehensive Child Welfare Information Systems (CCWIS). ( a ) The following terms as they appear in §§ 1355.50 through 1355.59 are defined as follows— *Approved activity* means a project task that supports planning, designing, developing, installing, operating, or maintaining a CCWIS.
*Automated function* means a computerized process or collection of related processes to achieve a purpose or goal.
*Child welfare contributing agency* means a public or private entity that, by contract or agreement with the title IV-E agency, provides child abuse and neglect investigations, placement, or child welfare case management (or any combination of these) to children and families.
*Data exchange* means the automated, electronic submission or receipt of information, or both, between two automated data processing systems.
*Data exchange standard* means the common data definitions, data formats, data values, and other guidelines that the state's or tribe's automated data processing systems follow when exchanging data.
*New CCWIS project* means a project to build an automated data processing system meeting all requirements in § 1355.52 and all automated functions meet the requirements in § 1355.53(a).
*Non-S/TACWIS project* means an active automated data processing system or project that, prior to the effective date of these regulations, ACF had not classified as a S/TACWIS and for which: ( i ) ACF approved a development procurement; or
( ii ) The applicable state or tribal agency approved a development procurement below the thresholds of 45 CFR 95.611(a); or
( iii ) The operational automated data processing system provided the data for at least one AFCARS or NYTD file for submission to the federal system or systems designated by ACF to receive the report.
*Notice of intent* means a record from the title IV-E agency, signed by the governor, tribal leader, or designated state or tribal official and provided to ACF declaring that the title IV-E agency plans to build a CCWIS project that is below the APD approval thresholds of 45 CFR 95.611(a).
*S/TACWIS project* means an active automated data processing system or project that, prior to the effective date of these regulations, ACF classified as a S/TACWIS and for which: ( i ) ACF approved a procurement to develop a S/TACWIS; or
( ii ) The applicable state or tribal agency approved a development procurement for a S/TACWIS below the thresholds of 45 CFR 95.611(a).
*Transition period* means the 24 months after the effective date of these regulations.
( b ) Other terms as they appear in §§ 1355.50 through 1355.59 are defined in 45 CFR 95.605.
[81 FR 35479, June 2, 2016]