alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 108 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 108

    Expressing the sense of the Senate on the European Commission's 
            handling of the Boeing/McDonnell-Douglas merger.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 16, 1997

  Mr. Gorton (for himself and Mrs. Feinstein) submitted the following 
  resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    Expressing the sense of the Senate on the European Commission's 
            handling of the Boeing/McDonnell-Douglas merger.

Whereas the Boeing Company and McDonnell-Douglas have announced their merger;
Whereas the Department of Defense has approved that merger as consistent with 
        the national security of the United States;
Whereas the Federal Trade Commission has found that merger not to violate the 
        antitrust laws of the United States;
Whereas the European Commission has consistently criticized and threatened the 
        merger before, during, and after its consideration of the facts; and
Whereas the sole true reason for the European Commission's criticism and 
        imminent disapproval of the merger is to gain an unfair competitive 
        advantage for Airbus, a government-owned aircraft manufacturer: Now, 
        therefore be it
    Resolved, That it is the Sense of the Senate that any such 
disapproval on the part of the European Commission would constitute an 
unwarranted and unprecedented interference in a United States business 
transaction that would threaten thousands of American aerospace jobs; 
and be it further
    Resolved, That the Senate suggest that the President take such 
actions as he deems appropriate to protect United States interests in 
connection therewith.
                                 <all>
```
No. 58733.

protest 229253-K (New York).

#### Edmond J. Lang *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of bird’s-foot trefoil seed *(Lotus corniculatus)*similar in all *274material respects to that the subject of *Transcontinental Seed, Inc. (Alltransport, Incorporated)*v. *United States*(29 Cust. Ct. 163, C. D. 1462), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. P67/195.

#### S. Hiller & Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 62/14823, etc. (New York).

LaNdis, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of certain padlocks, cabinet, or drawer locks similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Shriro Trading Corp.*v. *United States*(56 Cust. Ct. 422, C.D. 2669), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
From: Baldyga, Lyndsey [LBaldyga@tecoenergy.com]

Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 1:40 PM

To: Hofmeister, Art

Subject: Re: Circuit Breakers

Art,

The alarms are low pressure.

Thanks,

- Lyndsey Baldyga

Engineer I Air Programs

Sent from my Blackberry

From : Hofmeister, Art [ mailto:Hofmeister.Art@epa.gov ]

Sent : Tuesday, August 20, 2013 01:04 PM

To : Baldyga, Lyndsey

Subject : Circuit Breakers

Hi, Lyndsey:

Are the alarms on the circuit breakers low

- densit y of low

- pressure? Thanks.

Art Hofmeister

Environmental Engineer

Air Permits Section

EPA Region 4

(404) 562

- 9115



### ***** This email is from an external sen der. Be cautious about clicking links or opening

attachments from unknown sources. *****

NOTICE: This email is intended only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information. I f you have

received this email by mistake, please notify the sender immediately, delete this email from your system and do not copy or disclose it to

anyone else. Although we take precautions to protect against viruses, we advise you to take your own precautions to protect a gainst viruses

as we accept no liability for any which remain.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-30799 

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CHARLES RAY BLAIR, also known as Ray Blair,

also known as Jay Brown,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 98-CR-30023-1

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

February 21, 2002

Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Charles Ray Blair appeals his conviction and sentence for

conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine and

cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. 

Blair argues that the indictment failed to allege a drug quantity

or a leadership role in the offense in violation of Apprendi v.

New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). He also contends that 21 U.S.C.

§§ 841(a), (b), and 846 are unconstitutional.
No. 01-30799 

-2-

Although Blair’s indictment did not allege a drug quantity

or leadership role, he was not sentenced in excess of the 20-year 

statutory maximum under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(C). Consequently,

there was no Apprendi violation. United States v. Doggett, 230

F.3d 160, 166 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1177

(2001); United States v. Keith, 230 F.3d 784, 787 (5th Cir.

2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1182 (2001). The constitutionality

of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a), (b), and 846 has been upheld by this

court. See United States v. Slaughter, 238 F.3d 580, 582 (5th

Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1045 (2001). Accordingly,

Blair’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.
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 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

GINA SIMON, 

Plaintiff,

v.

BELLEVUE SCHOOL DISTRICT,

Defendant.

Case No. C06-0708RSL

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

This matter comes before the Court sua sponte. On April 2, 2007, defendant filed

a motion for summary judgment that, taken as a whole, exceeds 50 pages in length. (Dkt.

#17). As of this date, a courtesy copy of these documents has not been provided for

chambers. 

Defendant is hereby ORDERED to show cause why it should not be sanctioned

for failure to comply with two prior orders of this Court (Dkt. ## 6, 15) requiring

courtesy copies of lengthy filings for chambers. Defendant shall immediately deliver a

paper copy of the motion and all supporting documents, with tabs or other organizing aids

as necessary and clearly marked with the words “Courtesy Copy of Electronic Filing for

Chambers,” to the Clerk’s Office. 

Case 2:06-cv-00708-RSL Document 20 Filed 04/06/07 Page 1 of 2
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 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - 2

Defendant shall respond to this order to show cause no later than five days from the date

of this Order. 

DATED this 6th day of April, 2007.

A

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge

Case 2:06-cv-00708-RSL Document 20 Filed 04/06/07 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                             460
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   18,106
<ALLOWANCES>                                       316
<INVENTORY>                                     12,775
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                32,003
<PP&E>                                           8,519
<DEPRECIATION>                                     349
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  51,717
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           18,287
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            82
<OTHER-SE>                                      30,764
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    51,717
<SALES>                                          8,409
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 8,409
<CGS>                                            5,703
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    5,703
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,448
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    10
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  95
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (1,742)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (1,742)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1,742)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.11)
        

</TABLE>
No. 59798.

#### Acme Novelty Co. and Universal Foreign Service, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 25776A-K (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with rule 5 (b) of the rules of this court, as amended, the protest was dismissed for lack of prosecution.
**EXHIBIT 32.2****Section 1350 Certification by the Chief Financial Officer**     I, Michael Schradle, the chief financial officer of Micro Linear Corporation (the “Company”),certify for the purposes of section 1350 of chapter 63 of title 18 of the United States Code that,to the best of my knowledge,     (i) the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ended July 3, 2005 (the“Report”), complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,and     (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.        August 17, 2005 /s/ Michael W. Schradle   Michael W. Schradle   Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                       8,235,871
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               15,102,639
<ALLOWANCES>                                   861,019
<INVENTORY>                                 34,167,138
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            57,418,918
<PP&E>                                      21,713,245
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             106,354,541
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       19,464,962
<BONDS>                                      5,274,206
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          1
<COMMON>                                        28,822
<OTHER-SE>                                  80,568,181
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               106,354,541
<SALES>                                     63,814,861
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            63,814,861
<CGS>                                       51,586,043
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               51,586,043
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,110,071
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (608,480)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (608,480)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (608,480)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.03)
        

</TABLE>
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

CR05-391RSM - 1

(.RJF/rjf) U.S. COURTHOUSE

7TH & STEWART

SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98102

JUDGE MARTINEZ

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

Plaintiff, ) NO. CR05-391RSM

)

v. )

) ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL 

)

VALENTINO GUY, )

)

Defendant. )

_______________________________________)

ORDER 

In consideration of the Government’s motion for continuance, and the Court being fully

advised in the premises, the Court finds and rules as follows: This Court finds as facts those facts

set forth in the Government’s First and Second Motions for Continuance filed on behalf of all

parties, and those facts set forth in the Motion for Continuance regarding Valentino Guy. 

Further, the Court finds that given the nature and seriousness of the charges in this case, the

voluminous evidence in this case, the need to conduct adequate investigation, to consider

defenses, to file any appropriate pre-trial motions, and to prepare for trial, as well as the desire by

the parties to adequately explore resolution of this matter, this Court finds that the failure to grant

the requested continuance would unreasonably deny the defendants effective assistance of

counsel and, despite due diligence by all parties, result in a miscarriage of justice. Further, the

Court further finds that given the volume and complexity of the evidence, the duration and extent

of the alleged conspiracy, it is unreasonable to expect either the Government or defense counsel

to be prepared to go to trial within the time allotted, and a further continuance of trial is

warranted. Further, the Court finds that given the current trial date as to the remaining

Case 2:05-cr-00391-RSM Document 573 Filed 06/16/06 Page 1 of 2
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

CR05-391RSM - 2

(.RJF/rjf) U.S. COURTHOUSE

7TH & STEWART

SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98102

defendants, it is wholly reasonable and appropriate that defendant’s trial should go forward at the

same time, as it will involve much of the same testimony, witnesses, and evidence. 

The Court further finds, for the reasons set forth above, that the ends of justice served by

granting the requested continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a

speedy trial. For the foregoing reasons, the Government’s motion for a continuance of trial is

GRANTED. Trial is reset for September 11, 2006. The new motion cut-off date is August 1,

2006. The time from the filing of this motion for continuance, through the new trial date, is

excluded under the Speedy Trial Act, Title 18, United States Code, Sections 3161(h)(7),

3161(h)(8)(A) and (B)(i)(ii) and (iv) as to the defendant. 

DATED this 16th day of June, 2006. 

 A

RICARDO S. MARTINEZ

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:05-cr-00391-RSM Document 573 Filed 06/16/06 Page 2 of 2
01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

DETENTION ORDER 15.13

18 U.S.C. § 3142(i) Rev. 1/91

PAGE 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v. 

IVAN KWONG,

Defendant. ____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 06-248M

DETENTION ORDER 

Offenses charged:

Count 1: Unlawful Importation of MDMA in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952(a),

960(a)(1), and 960(b)(3).

Count 2: Possession with Intent to Distribute Ecstacy in violation of 21 U.S.C.

§§ 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(C).

Date of Detention Hearing: May 25, 2006.

The Court, having conducted a detention hearing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), and

based upon the factual findings and statement of reasons for detention hereafter set forth,

finds the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DETENTION

(1) Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e), there is a rebuttable presumption that

defendant is a flight risk and a danger to the community based on the nature of the pending

charges. Application of presumption is appropriate in this case.

(2) Defendant is a native and citizen of Canada.

(3) Defendant has no ties to this community or to the Western District of

Case 2:06-mj-00248-JPD Document 13 Filed 05/25/06 Page 1 of 2
01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

DETENTION ORDER 15.13

18 U.S.C. § 3142(i) Rev. 1/91

PAGE 2

Washington.

(4) Defendant has a prior conviction in Canada of a similar nature as the instant

alleged offense charged.

(5) Defendant’s alleged offense involves amounts of substantial deliveries of

MDMA.

(6) There appear to be no conditions or combination of conditions other than

detention that will address the risk of flight and the danger to other persons of the community

posed by defendant.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:

(1) Defendant shall be detained pending trial and committed to the custody of the

Attorney General for confinement in a correction facility separate, to the

extent practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in

custody pending appeal;

(2) Defendant shall be afforded reasonable opportunity for private consultation

with counsel;

(3) On order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the

government, the person in charge of the corrections facility in which

defendant is confined shall deliver the defendant to a United States Marshal

for the purpose of an appearance in connection with a court proceeding; and

(4) The Clerk shall direct copies of this Order to counsel for the United States, to

counsel for the defendant, to the United States Marshal, and to the United

States Pretrial Services Officer.

DATED this 26th day of May, 2006.AJAMES P. DONOHUE

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 2:06-mj-00248-JPD Document 13 Filed 05/25/06 Page 2 of 2
No. 55687.

protests 169663-K, etc. (New York).

#### Air Clearance Assn., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

The protests were dismissed.
AO 450 (Rev. 5/85) Judgment in a Civil Case r

United States District Court

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

CAROLYN NICOLET,

Plaintiff, JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE

v.

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, CASE NUMBER: C05-5792rBL

Commissioner of Social Security

 Administration,

 Defendants,

 Jury Verdict. This action came before the Court for a trial by jury. The issues have been tried

and the jury has rendered its verdict.

X Decision by Court. This action came to trial or hearing before the Court. The issues have been

tried or heard and a decision has been rendered.

 IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED

Based on the Stipulation of the parties, attorney fees in the amount of $7,462.00 will be 

awarded to Plaintiff pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. & 2412 and 

costs in the amount of $37.87 will be awarded to Plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C. & 1920.

 April 18, 2007 BRUCE RIFKIN 

Clerk

 /s/ Pat LeFrois 

 Deputy Clerk

Case 3:05-cv-05792-RBL Document 34 Filed 04/18/07 Page 1 of 1
DEPTH OF SOIL SAMPLE, IN FEET

RESIDUUM,

Fa
ie}
cI
=
ra
rr]
ia
a
2
<
a
z

EK
Ni
a!
z'
%
ry
Fa
5
a
ws
co}
<
ra
=
z

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

1000
ZINC, IN PARTS PER MILLION

500
LEAD, IN PARTS PER MILLION

—

—

No pure residuum
collected here

BULLETIN 1000 PLATE 13

EXPLANATION
Zine
Lead
Zine and lead
—
Component of slope

parallel to traverse

PERCENT OF RESIDUAL
MATERIAL IN SOIL

Less than 25 percent
25 to 50 percent

50 to 100 percent

Concentration of zinc and lead
was obtained using a 1:3 HNO,
digestion for 1 hour

‘ ; sstepes
90 100 110,
DISTANCE ALONG TRAVERSE, IN FEET

a po
120 130 140 160

180 200

ce)
e
Zz

290 o 9

250
240 Ce)
020 EXPLANATION
7)
° Small prospect pit

950
Sample point and the
distance along traverse, in feet
—>2
Direction and estimated amount
of land slope

0 50 Feet

MAP SHOWING DISTRIBUTION OF PROSPECT PITS
AND LOCATION OF SAMPLE TRAVERSE

DISTRIBUTION OF LEAD AND ZINC IN SOIL NEAR POINT J IN THE POTOSI AREA

369014 O—36 (In pocket) No. 7
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 quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Sepracor Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended
June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Robert F. Scumaci, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to his knowledge:



Date: August 8, 2008

/s/ROBERT F. SCUMACIRobert F. Scumaci Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Sepracor Inc. and will be retained by Sepracor Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---



QuickLinks
# Official Journal L 197I/2021

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 197I |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 644 June 2021 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 197I

English edition

Legislation

Volume 644 June 2021

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Council Regulation (EU) 2021/907 of 4 June 2021 amending Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus | 1 |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | * | Council Decision (CFSP) 2021/908 of 4 June 2021 amending Decision 2012/642/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus | 3 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Council Regulation (EU) 2021/907 of 4 June 2021 amending Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus

1

DECISIONS

*

Council Decision (CFSP) 2021/908 of 4 June 2021 amending Decision 2012/642/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus

3

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.