alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Department of Agriculture

DO YOU WANT TO GET TO THE NEXT LEVEL AT SCHOOL AND PLAY? 

STAY PHYSICALLY ACTIVE AND CHOOSE MORE FRUITS AND VEGGIES.

U.S. Department of Agriculture • Food and Nutrition Service • March 2014

FNS-468-B • USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

http://teamnutrition.usda.gov
From: craig.amnott@us.army.mil

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:24:30 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Craig Amnott

New Windsor, NY 12553
From: lgrismer@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:29:08 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Luann Grismer

Placentia, CA 92870
RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY 

ACT

SIXTH PROGRAM REVISION APPLICATION

FOR THE STATE OF

NEBRASKA

SUBMITTED BY THE

NEBRASKA DEPARTMENT OF 

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

FOR THE

U.S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION VII

LENEXA, KS

September 16, 2016
Exhibit 11.1


                 Statement re: Computation of Per Share Earnings


The  following  table sets forth the  computation  of earnings per share for the
three months ended March 31, 1997 and 1996. The computation of weighted  average
common shares and common share  equivalents on a fully diluted basis is the same
as on the primary  basis since the average and ending  market  price used in the
computation is the same.


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                       1997           1996
                                                                   -----------    -----------

<S>                                                                <C>            <C>        
Net income (loss) before extraordinary item                        $  (503,000)   $   316,000

Extraordinary item, net                                             (1,557,000)             -
                                                                   -----------    -----------
Net income (loss)                                                  $(2,060,000)   $   316,000
                                                                   ===========    ===========
Weighted average outstanding
    common shares (includes 100,000 and 66,667
    shares subject to put option in 1997 and 1996,                     953,674        838,859
    respectively)

Increase due to assumed issuance of shares
    related to outstanding  stock options
    using the treasury stock method                                          -          1,574

Increase due to assumed exercise of stock
    warrants using the treasury stock method                                 -        136,763
                                                                   -----------    -----------
Adjusted weighted average number of
    common shares and common share equivalents                         953,674        977,196
                                                                   ===========    ===========
Earnings (loss) per common share and
    common share equivalent:
Net income (loss) before extraordinary item                        $     (0.53)   $      0.32
Extraordinary item, net                                                  (1.63)             -
                                                                   -----------    -----------
    Net income (loss)                                              $     (2.16)   $      0.32
                                                                   ===========    ===========

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 183 (Friday, September 22, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 65389]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20591]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL OP-OFA-087]


Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General 
Information 202-564-5632 or https://www.epa.gov/nepa.

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements (EIS)
Filed September 11, 2023 10 a.m. EST Through September 18, 2023 10 a.m. 
EST
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

Notice

    Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public 
its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment 
letters on EISs are available at: https://cdxapps.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-II/public/action/eis/search.

EIS No. 20230122, Draft, FTA, WA, Operations and Maintenance Facility 
South NEPA Draft/SEPA Supplemental Draft, Environmental Impact 
Statement, Comment Period Ends: 11/06/2023, Contact: Justin Zweifel 
206-220-7538.
EIS No. 20230123, Final, FERC, VA, Virginia Reliability Project and 
Commonwealth Energy Connector Project, Review Period Ends: 10/23/2023, 
Contact: Office of External Affairs 866-208-3372.

Amended Notice

EIS No. 20230098, Draft, NPS, MT, Yellowstone National Park Bison 
Management Plan Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Comment Period 
Ends: 10/10/2023, Contact: Morgan Warthin, Public Affairs Specialist, 
Yellowstone National Park 307-344-2010. Revision to FR Notice Published 
08/11/2023; Extending the Comment Period from 09/25/2023 to 10/10/2023.

    Dated: September 18, 2023.
Cindy S. Barger,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2023-20591 Filed 9-21-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOUND
ON PAGE 35 AND 36 OF THE FORM 10-K AS FILED WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION AT DECEMBER 29, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          10,221
<SECURITIES>                                    54,480
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,552
<ALLOWANCES>                                       437
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                78,122
<PP&E>                                           8,894
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,910
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  83,106
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           17,200
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        72,046
<OTHER-SE>                                       6,140
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    65,906
<SALES>                                         29,860
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                38,874
<CGS>                                            1,768
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   36,752
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   284
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  27
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,109
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (635)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,744
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,744
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.36
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.33


</TABLE>
Before the Second Division,

July 19, 1966

No. P66/160. —

#### E. M. Stevens Corporation *v.*United States, protests 62/12367(A), etc. (New York).

Kao, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of knives similar in all material respects to those the subject of *National Carloading Corp.*v. *United States*(54 Cust. Ct. 178, C.D. 2529), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
#### Jaime VARGAS-MAGALLON, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 02-72624, [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 1, 2005.*

Decided Aug. 4, 2005.

Charles E. Nichol, Law Office of Charles E. Nichol, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.

Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, San Francisco, CA, Emily A. Radford, Josh Braunstein, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before O’SCANNLAIN, CALLAHAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

*604MEMORANDUM**

Jaime Vargas-Magallon, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for cancellation of removal. We review de novo due process challenges, *Iturribarria v. INS,*321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), and we dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.

The IJ denied Vargas-Magallon’s application for cancellation of removal because he failed to establish that his daughter, who is a United States citizen, would suffer exceptional and extremely unusual hardship if he is removed to Mexico. We lack jurisdiction to review this discretionary determination. *See Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft,*327 F.3d 887, 888 (9th Cir.2003).

We reject Vargas-Magallon’s contention that he was denied due process when the IJ continued his hearing for six days due to the unavailability of the interpreter.1 Vargas-Magallon agreed to the continuance and has not demonstrated prejudice because he did not show that the continuance affected the outcome of the proceedings. *See Lata v. INS,*204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir.2000).

Vargas-Magallon’s contention that the BIA’s use of the streamlining procedure violated his right to due process is foreclosed by *Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft,*350 F.3d 845, 850-51 (9th Cir.2003).

Because the government has supplemented the record to include the two missing pages of the hearing transcript, we reject Vargas-Magallon’s contention that this case should be remanded for compilation of a complete transcript.

The voluntary departure period was stayed, and that stay will expire upon issuance of the mandate. *See Desta v. Ashcroft,*365 F.3d 741 (9th Cir.2004).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

1

. Because Vargas-Magallon raised this issue in his notice of appeal to the BIA, we reject the government’s contention that he failed to exhaust administrative remedies.
EXHIBIT 99.2

                            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  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q of WNC Housing Tax
Credit VI, L.P., Series 6 (the "Partnership") for the period ended June 30, 2003
as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the
"Report"),  and  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.,  section  1350,  as adopted  pursuant to
section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  I,  Wilfred N.  Cooper,  Sr.,
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates,  Inc., general partner
of the Partnership, hereby certify that to my knowledge:

     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 result of operations of
          the Partnership.


/s/THOMAS J. RIHA
-----------------
Thomas J. Riha
Chief Financial Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.
August 11, 2003
From: jimstivers@hctc.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:00:37 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Jim Stivers

Shelton, WA 98584
Exhibit 33.2
 MANAGEMENTS ASSERTION OF COMPLIANCE
 Company
  Platform: Publicly-issued (i.e., transaction-level reporting initially required
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) automobile loan or lease-backed
securities and student loan-backed securities issued on or after January 1, 2006, for which
the Company provides trustee and paying agent services (the Platform)
 Applicable Servicing Criteria: All servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d), to
the extent required by Item 1122(d) servicing criteria in regards to the activities performed
by the Company with respect to the Platform as to any transaction, except for the following
criteria: 1122(d)(1)(i)-1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(2)(i), 1122(d)(2)(iii),
1122(d)(2)(vi)-1122(d)(2)(vii), 1122(d)(3)(i) and 1122(d)(4)(i)-1122(d)(4)(xv), which
management has determined are not applicable to the activities the Company performs with
respect to the Platform (the Applicable Servicing Criteria).
 Period: Twelve months ended December 31, 2009 (the Period).
  
    
    The Companys management is responsible for assessing the Companys compliance with
the Applicable Servicing Criteria.
 
    
    The Companys management has assessed compliance with the Applicable Servicing
Criteria. In making this assessment, management used the criteria set forth by the
Securities and Exchange Commission in paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of Regulation AB.
 
    
    Based on such assessment, the Company has complied, in all material respects, with
the Applicable Servicing Criteria.
  CITIBANK, N.A.By:
    /s/ Karen MontbachKaren MontbachIts:
    Managing Director
No. P68/462.

protest 66/73474 (Los Angeles).

#### The Nissho Amer. Corp. *v.*United States,

Rao, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protest consists of pistol grips for motion picture cameras similar in all material respects to those the subject of *J. E. Bernard &*Co., *Inc.*v. *United States*(57 Cust. Ct. 143, C.D. 2744), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as principal financial officer of AGY
Holding Corp. (the Company), does hereby certify that to the undersigneds knowledge:

1) the Companys annual report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 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 Companys annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.



|                                                                            
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ C. Steven Smoot                                                         
|Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer) 
Dated: March 31, 2011

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to AGY Holding Corp. and will be retained by AGY Holding Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
No. 227, Misc.

#### Miles et al. *v.*Walker, Warden.

Supreme Court of Louisiana. Certiorari denied.
### SERVED: MARCH 13, 2013

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, DC

IN THE MATTER OF 

### CORNERSTONE AVIATION, INC.

FAADOCKETNo. [TO BE ASSIGNED] (Civil Penalty Case) DMS FAA-2012-1293 

### ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE Respondent Cornerstone Aviation, Inc. ("Respondent") has requestedthatthis matter, currently scheduledto beheard on Apri123, 2013, be continuedto a date after May 6. In support, Respondent cites a previous commitment. Complainant Federal Aviation Administration ("Complainant") states that ithas no objectionto grant ofthe request. ·Forgood cause shown, the request ofRespondent for a continuance is GRANTED. The hearing date will be re-set for a date after May 6 by subsequent order.

# g-~C-~(J Richard C. Goodwin U.S. Administrative LawJudge Attachment

- Service ListSERVICE LIST ORIGINAL & ONE COPY Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1 000 1 ONE COPY Susan J. Horstman, ChiefExecutive Officer Cornerstone Aviation, Inc., Respondent 337 North 2370 West #130 Salt Lake City, UT 84116 TEL: 801-355-2244 FAX: 801-355-2754 Kyle Lomazow, Complainant's c;ounsel Attorney, Office ofthe Regional Counsel Northwest Mountain Region, ANM-7 Federal Aviation Administration 1601 Lind Avenue, S.W. Renton, W A 98057 TEL: 425-227-1847 FAX: 425-227-1007 The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin,

AdministrativeLawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 202-366-5121 StaffAssistant FAX: 202-366-7536 FDMS No. FAA-2011-1293 (Civil Penalty Action)

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket (;Jerk, AGC-430.

2
No. 60978.

protest 291561-K (New York).

#### Epic, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

The protest was dismissed for lack of prosecution.