alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 194 (Tuesday, October 10, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 69922]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-22457]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK


Sunshine Act Meetings

    Notice of Open Meeting of the Advisory Committee of the Export-
Import Bank of the United States (EXIM).

TIME AND DATE: Wednesday, October 18 from 4:00-4:30 p.m. EDT. A joint 
meeting of the EXIM Advisory Committee, Sub-Saharan Africa Advisory 
Committee, and EXIM Advisory Councils will be held from 4:00-4:30 p.m. 
EDT.

PLACE: The Washington Hilton Hotel, 1919 Connecticut Ave. NW, 
Washington, DC 20009 and Virtual. The meeting will be held in person 
for committee members, EXIM's Board of Directors and support staff, and 
virtually for all other participants.

REGISTRATION AND PUBLIC COMMENT: Virtual Public Participation: The 
meeting will be open to public participation virtually and time will be 
allotted for questions or comments submitted online. Members of the 
public may also file written statements before or after the meeting to 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#670603110e1408151e27021f0e0a49000811"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="69080d1f001a061b10290c110004470e061f">[email protected]</span></a>.
    Interested parties may register for the meeting at: https://events.teams.microsoft.com/event/5a102c27-d9ae-490d-a143-db0c4412029a@b953013c-c791-4d32-996f-518390854527.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Discussion of EXIM policies and programs to 
provide competitive financing to expand United States exports and 
comments for inclusion in EXIM's Report to the U.S. Congress on Global 
Export Credit Competition.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: For further information, contact 
India Walker, External Engagement Specialist, at 202-480-0062 or 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#30595e5459511e47515c5b5542705548595d1e575f46"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="472e29232e266930262b2c223507223f2e2a69202831">[email protected]</span></a>.

Joyce B. Stone,
Assistant Corporate Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-22457 Filed 10-5-23; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6690-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                       3,010,849
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,089,350
<ALLOWANCES>                                    12,349
<INVENTORY>                                  5,145,585
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            11,311,906
<PP&E>                                       9,969,582
<DEPRECIATION>                                (720,688)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              32,386,411
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       19,731,978
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        4,853,774
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       265,711
<OTHER-SE>                                  (3,756,998)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                32,386,411
<SALES>                                      1,316,409
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,316,409
<CGS>                                        1,964,838
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  635,915
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               585,446
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             621,888
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (1,101,318)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (1,101,318)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (1,101,318)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.09)


</TABLE>
III

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 194

Designating the week of April 20 through April 26, 1998, as ‘‘National

Kick Drugs Out of America Week’’.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 10, 1998

Mrs. HUTCHISON submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

RESOLUTION

Designating the week of April 20 through April 26, 1998,

as ‘‘National Kick Drugs Out of America Week’’.

Whereas the overwhelming problems in our country resulting

from drug abuse are staggering;

Whereas youth violence and gangs are serious problems in

America today;

Whereas in inner-city and suburban schools drug and gang

related peer pressures are at an all time high;

Whereas tragically, many young people today receive little or

no guidance or direction from family, role models, or

schools; and

Whereas one method of helping fight the war on drugs and

youth violence is to support educational and motivational

programs aimed primarily at the youth of America that
2

•SRES 194 IS

help guide young people and support their decisions to

reject drugs and violence: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the Senate designates the week of

2 April 20 through April 26, 1998, as ‘‘National Kick Drugs

3 Out of America Week’’.

Æ
<PAGE>

                                                                     EXHIBIT 4.1


                 Form of Share Certificate for Ordinary Shares
                 ---------------------------------------------


                  INTERSHOP Communications Aktiengesellschaft

                                    Hamburg

                                 Globalurkunde

                                      uber

          3.394.967 auf den Inhaber lautende Stammaktien (Stuckaktien)

                              Nr. ________________

                   mit Gewinnberechtigung ab ________________

Die Inhaber dieser Globalaktie sind mit ________________ Stuckaktien an der
INTERSHOP Comunications Aktiengesellschaft in Hamburg nach Magabe der Satzung
als Aktionare beteiligt.

                              Hamburg, im ________________


                              INTERSHOP Communications Aktiengesellschaft


                              Der Aufsichstrat         Der Forstand


                              __________________       __________________
ORDER DENYING WITNESS

DEPOSITION

ROSENAU/CR06-157MJP

PLATT & BUESCHER

Attorneys at Law

P.O. Box 727

Coupeville, WA 98239-0727

Phone: (360)678-6777

Fax: (360)678-0323

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

Chief Judge Marsha J. Pechman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

HENRY C. ROSENAU

Defendant.

NO. CR06-157MJP

[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING

WITNESS DEPOSITION

This matter having come on before the undersigned Court on motion of the

Government’s Renoted Motion for Authorization to Depose Foreign Witnesses and Emergency

Request for Ruling Regarding Procedure at Depositions.

Having considered the files and records herein, and pleadings of the parties, the Court

denies the Government’s Renoted Motion for Authorization to Depose Foreign Witnesses, and

holds that, pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 15 and in the interests of justice, the

Government is denied authorization to take the depositions of witness Kip Whelpley and

Zachary Miraback in the above-entitled matter.

SO ORDERED this ________ day of March, 2012.

____________________________________

MARSHA J. PECHMAN

United States District Court Chief Judge

Case 2:06-cr-00157-MJP Document 81-1 Filed 03/08/12 Page 1 of 2
ORDER DENYING WITNESS

DEPOSITION

ROSENAU/CR06-157MJP

PLATT & BUESCHER

Attorneys at Law

P.O. Box 727

Coupeville, WA 98239-0727

Phone: (360)678-6777

Fax: (360)678-0323

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

Presented by:

s/Craig Platt_______________

Craig Platt

Attorney for Defendant

Case 2:06-cr-00157-MJP Document 81-1 Filed 03/08/12 Page 2 of 2
No. 53308.

protest 124186-K (New York).

#### British West Indies Co. *v.*United States,

*114Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise consist of sisal handbags similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Goldberg & Seltzer, Inc.*(36 C. C. P. A. 64, C. A. D. 399), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Robert CRUZ-AYON, aka Alberto Aguinaga-Ceja, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 04-10328.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Aug. 11, 2005.

R. Don Gifford, II, USRE-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Reno, NV, for Plaintiff— Appellee.

Michael K. Powell, Esq., FPDNV-Federal Public Defender’s Office, Reno, NV, for Defendant-Appellant.

ON REMAND FROM THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT. D.C. No. CR-03-00033-E CR.

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and TROTT, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM *

The Supreme Court vacated our judgment entered December 6, 2004, and remanded for further consideration in light of *United States v. Booker,*— U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005).

Cruz-Ayon’s Sixth-Amendment challenge to his enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b) remains foreclosed after *Booker. See United States v. Moreno-Hernandez,*No. 03-30387, 2005 WL 1560269, *8 n. 8 (9th Cir. July 5, 2005) (explaining that a district judge’s enhancing a sentence based on the fact of a prior conviction under *642§ 2L1.2 does not raise any Sixth Amendment problems).

Because Cruz-Ayon was sentenced under the then-mandatory Sentencing Guidelines, and we cannot reliably determine from the record whether the sentence imposed would have been materially different had the district court known that the Guidelines were advisory, we remand to the sentencing court to answer that question, and to proceed pursuant to *United States v. Ameline,*409 F.3d 1073, 1084 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc). *See United States v. Moreno-Hernandez, id.,*at *9 (extending Ameline’s limited remand procedure to cases involving non-constitutional *Booker*error).

REMANDED.

*

 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.
Exhibit 32   CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002   I, Scott Emerson Lybbert, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of TGFIN Holdings, Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of TGFIN Holdings, Inc.   By:  /s/ Scott Emerson Lybbert Name: Scott Emerson Lybbert Title: Chief Executive Officer      I, Scott Emerson Lybbert, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of TGFIN Holdings, Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of TGFIN Holdings, Inc.   By: /s/ Scott Emerson Lybbert Name: Scott Emerson Lybbert Title: Chief Financial Officer
#### Michael Jerome ISREAL, Petitioner, v. Robert L. AYERS, Jr. Warden, California Board of Prison Terms, Respondent.

No. 99-70569.

D.C. No. CV-99-00740-CW.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted Feb. 15, 2001.

Decided April 6, 2001.

As Amended on Denial of Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc May 21, 2001.

*497Before ALARCÓN, KOZINSKI, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM *

The Board of Prison Terms denied Isreal parole on the ground that he would pose a threat to the public, while his initial federal habeas petition was pending. At that time, Isreal could have asked that his petition be stayed so that he might exhaust the new claim in the California courts and then raise it in his pending federal habeas petition. *See Calderon v. United States Dist. Court,*134 F.3d 981, 986-88 (9th Cir.1998); *see also Fetterly v. Paskett,*997 F.2d 1295, 1301-02 (9th Cir.1993) (district court abused its discretion by refusing to stay proceedings so that the petitioner might exhaust a new claim and introduce it in an amended habeas petition). Having failed to do so, Isreal may not raise that claim, or an identical claim arising out of the 1998 parole denial, in a second or successive habeas petition. *See*28 U.S.C. § 2244(b).

In the alternative, Isreal argues for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Our “authority to grant habeas relief to state prisoners is limited by § 2254, which specifies the conditions under which such relief may be granted to ‘a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court.’ ” *Felker v. Turpin,*518 U.S. 651, 662, 116 S.Ct. 2333, 135 L.Ed.2d 827 (1996) (citation omitted); *see also Greenawalt v. Stewart,*105 F.3d 1287, 1287 (9th Cir.1997). Isreal may not “avoid the limitations imposed on successive petitions by styling his petition as one pursuant to § 2241.” *Id.*at 1287.

Nor may Isreal challenge the parole denial under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. A prisoner may challenge the lawfulness of the general criteria employed by parole boards under section 1983. *See Bogovich v. Sandoval,*189 F.3d 999, 1003-04 (9th Cir.1999). However, a prisoner may not allege that the parole board improperly denied his request for parole. *See Butterfield v. Bail,*120 F.3d 1023, 1024 (9th Cir.1997). Although Isreal seeks to cast *498his claim as a challenge to the criteria, he essentially argues that he was arbitrarily denied parole because he could not pose a threat to society from within a Missouri prison. Such a claim may not be raised in a section 1983 action.

DENIED.

*

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**EXHIBIT 31.2**
**Rule 13a-14(a) Certification by the Chief Financial Officer**
I, Michael Schradle, certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Micro LinearCorporation;
     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared; b)Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and c) Disclosed in this report anychange in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and
     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, tothe registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report 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: November 10, 2004      By: /s/ Michael Schradle      Michael Schradle   Chief Financial Officer   (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
No. 57044.

protests 157553-K, etc. (New York).

#### Keepnews Importers, Inc., and Intra-Mar Transport Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

*332Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise consist of figures or figurines similar in all material repeats to those passed upon in *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.*v. *United States*(39 C. C. P. A. 15, C. A. D. 458), the articles covered by protest 157553-K were held dutiable at 20 percent under paragraph 1547 (a), and the merchandise covered by protest 189073-K was held dutiable at 10 percent under said paragraph, as modified by T. D. 52476.
**SAFESTITCH      MEDICAL, INC.**

**Exhibit      32.1**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT**

**TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

| (1) | the                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                and |
|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (2) | the                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of SafeStitch                Medical, Inc. |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | By:                /s/                Jeffrey G.                Spragens                                                            Jeffrey                G. SpragensChief                Executive Officer and PresidentAugust                8, 2008 |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----
Before the Second Division,

January 25, 1968

No. P68/20.

protests 61/7201 (B), etc. (New York).

#### Consolidated Sewing Machine Corp. *v.*United States,

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of clutch-brake electric motors similar in all material respects to those the subject of *ACEC Electric Corp.*v. *United States*(55 Cust. Ct. 138, C.D. 2563), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 04736

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2

File Name Description

04736\04736_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted

x 04736\04736_Part A.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 04736\04736_Part B.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 04736\04736_Part C.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 04736\04736_Part D.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 04736\04736_Part E.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 04736\04736_Part H.xls Plant submitted survey file

04736\Certification Statement Plant ID 04736.pdf Plant certification statement

x 04736\Supplemental Documents\04736_Map1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 04736\Supplemental Documents\04736_Map2.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 04736\Supplemental Documents\04736_Water Balance.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 04736\04736_Checklist.XLS EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

04736\04736_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

04736\04736_Financial Report 2007.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

04736\04736_Financial Report 2008.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

04736\04736_Annual Report 2009.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database . 

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket.