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

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 52

Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the need to address immediately

the current milk crisis.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 11, 1997

Mr. SPECTER (for himself, Mr. SANTORUM, Mr. FEINGOLD, Mr. KOHL, Mr.

JEFFORDS, and Mr. LEAHY) submitted the following resolution; which

was ordered to lie over, under the rule

FEBRUARY 13, 1997

Indefinitely postponed

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the need to

address immediately the current milk crisis.

Whereas during the last few months farm milk prices have

experienced substantial volatility, dropping precipitously

from $15.37 per hundredweight in September 1996 to

$11.34 per hundredweight in December 1996 while simultaneously there have been record high costs for cattle

feed;

Whereas there is a strong sense of financial crisis in the

dairy industry;

Whereas many dairy farmers have looked to the Federal Government for relief because minimum milk prices under
2

SRES 52 IPS

the Milk Marketing Orders are established by the Department of Agriculture;

Whereas the price of cheese at the National Cheese Exchange

in Green Bay, Wisconsin, influences milk prices paid to

farmers because of its use in the Department of Agriculture’s Basic Formula Price under Federal Milk Marketing Orders;

Whereas less than 1 percent of the cheese produced in the

United States is sold on the National Cheese Exchange

and the Exchange acts as a reference price for as much

as 95 percent of the commercial bulk cheese sales in the

Nation;

Whereas there has been some concern among dairy producers

that the prices at the National Cheese Exchange may

have been manipulated downward, benefiting processors

at the expense of dairy farmers; and

Whereas it is in the national interest to ensure that market

prices for milk, cheese, and other dairy products are determined by a fair and competitive marketplace: Now,

therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate of the

2 United States that the Secretary of Agriculture should act

3 immediately pursuant to his legal authority to modify the

4 Basic Formula Price for dairy by replacing the National

5 Cheese Exchange as a factor to be considered in setting

6 the Basic Formula Price and to establish in its place an

7 equivalent pricing mechanism more reflective of the actual
3

SRES 52 IPS

1 market conditions for cheese and other dairy products na2 tionally.

Æ
#### Sukhwinder SINGH, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 04-72000.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 1, 2005.*

Decided Aug. 15, 2005.

*662Before: 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).

MEMORANDUM **

Sukhwinder Singh, a.k.a Harjit Singh Kanda, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for adjustment of status. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo the agency’s application of a statute, *see Cervantes-Gonzales v. INS,*244 F.3d 1001, 1004 (9th Cir.2001), and we deny the petition for review.

We affirm the IJ’s determination that Singh was inadmissible under INA § 212(a)(6)(C)® due to his long history of misrepresentation and fraud. *See*8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(C)®. Specifically, Singh admits that he applied for asylum, and was convicted of sexual battery and false imprisonment by violence under one name, and then filed an application for adjustment of status under another name. In conjunction with his adjustment application, Singh stated under oath that he had never been arrested, charged, or fined for breaking any law and had never sought to procure immigration benefits by fraud or willful misrepresentation. Then, in his adjustment interview, Singh stated under oath that he had never used an alias. Under these facts, the IJ’s determination that Singh was inadmissible is not manifestly contrary to law. *See 8*U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(C).

Singh’s remaining contentions lack merit.

PETITION FOR REVIEW 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 Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            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-QSB/A for the period
ended March 31, 2005 (the "Report") of FirstFed  Bancorp,  Inc. (the "Company"),
as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof,  the
undersigned, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby each certify that to the best of our knowledge:

      (1)   the Report fully complies with the  requirements of section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

      (2)   the  information  contained in the Report  fairly  presents,  in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company as of and for the periods covered in the Report.



\s\ B. K. Goodwin, III                                August 22, 2005
-------------------------------------------           --------------------------
B. K. Goodwin, III, Chief Executive Officer           Date


\s\ Lynn J. Joyce                                     August 22, 2005
-------------------------------------------           --------------------------
Lynn J. Joyce, Chief Financial Officer                Date


A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange  Commission or its staff upon request.  The  information
furnished  herein  shall not be deemed to be filed for purposes of Section 18 of
the  Securities  Exchange Act of 1934,  nor shall it be deemed  incorporated  by
reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933.
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

ORDER

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

JOHN MCWHORTER,

Petitioner,

v.

JEFFREY UTTECHT,

Respondent.

Case No. C06-5294RBL

ORDER DENYING

PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

The court has reviewed petitioner's motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. 13) and the balance of

the record. It is therefore ORDERED.

(l) There is no right to have counsel appointed in cases brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, unless an

evidentiary hearing is required or such appointment is “necessary for the effective utilization of discovery

procedures.” See McCleskey v. Zant, 499 U.S. 467, 495 (1991); United States v. Duarte-Higareda, 68

F.3d 369, 370 (9th Cir. 1995); United States v. Angelone, 894 F.2d 1129, 1130 (9th Cir. 1990); Weygandt

v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983); Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States

District Courts 6(a) and 8(c). The court also may appoint counsel “at any stage of the case if the interests

of justice so require.” Weygandt, 718 F.2d at 754. In deciding whether to counsel, however, the court

“must evaluate the likelihood of success on the merits as well as the ability of the petitioner to articulate his

claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.” Id. 

(2) Petitioner has not requested he be allowed to conduct discovery in this matter, nor does the

undersigned find good cause for granting him leave to do so at this stage of the proceedings. See Rule

Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts 6(a). In addition, as the court has not

Case 3:06-cv-05294-RBL Document 16 Filed 09/18/06 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

ORDER

Page - 2

determined whether an evidentiary hearing will be required in this case. See Rule Governing Section 2254

Cases in the United States District Courts 8(c). 

After reviewing the record, this court finds an evidentiary hearing is not necessary at this point. 

Petitioner's motion for appointment of counsel is therefore DENIED. 

DATED this 18th day of September, 2006.

/s/ J. Kelley Arnold J. Kelley Arnold

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cv-05294-RBL Document 16 Filed 09/18/06 Page 2 of 2
| 1.     | The forgoing Report on Form 10-K fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and                 |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                                                                                                           |
| 2.     | The information contained in the Report on Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Fund. |
|   |                                                                                                                                                           |

|   |   /s/ Jeremy L. Standrod            |   |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Jeremy L. Standrod, Managing Partner          |   |
|   | Aspen Partners, Ltd.                          |   |
|   | Managing Member of Aspen Diversified Fund LLC |   |

----
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 6873** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. NYRON JOEL NICHOLS, a/k/a Red , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia , at Roanoke
. Glen E. Conrad , Chief District Judge. ( 7:07

- cr - 00006

- GEC

- 1 ; 7:12

- cv - 80544

- GEC

- RSB )

Submitted : October 30, 2015 Decided: November 5, 2015

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and AGEE , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Nyron Joel Nichols , Appellant Pro Se. Ronald Andrew Bassford, Assistant United States Attorney , Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Nyron Joel Nichols seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (B) (2012) . A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Nichols has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. W e dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately3 presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
No. 76-5487.

#### Buzynski *v.*Oliver et al.

C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.
No. 54444.

#### Winthrop-Stearns, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 148388-K and 148389-K (Detroit).

Opinion by

Cole, J.

The protests were dismissed.
|What's New ·

What's Next ·

Site Map ·
A-Z Index ·
Careers ·

RSS ·
All Videos ·

Current FAQs |  | Search Advanced Search | 
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------- | 

Aboutthe Fed
    News& Events
    MonetaryPolicy
    BankingInformation& Regulation
    PaymentSystems
    EconomicResearch& Data
    Consumer Information
    CommunityDevelopment
    ReportingForms
    Publications


skip to content 
 Home Economic Research & Data Statistical Releases and Historical Data
 DDP Print
   Financial Accounts of the United States - Z.1 Current Release
Release Dates
Enhanced Financial Accounts
Financial Accounts Guide
Technical Q&As
Announcements
  L.224 Mutual Fund Shares (1)  
 Billions of dollars; amounts outstanding end of period, not seasonally adjusted Description
Series code
2014
2015
2016
2015   Q3
2015   Q4
2016   Q1
2016   Q2
2016   Q3
2016   Q4
LineMutual funds; mutual fund shares; liability
	LM653164205
	13150.6
	12897.2
	13615.6
	12605.7
	12897.2
	12962.1
	13208.8
	13682.6
	13615.6
	1Mutual funds; mutual fund shares; liability
	LM653164205
	13150.6
	12897.2
	13615.6
	12605.7
	12897.2
	12962.1
	13208.8
	13682.6
	13615.6
	2Households and nonprofit organizations; mutual fund shares; asset
	LM153064205
	6726.2
	6504.3
	6851.5
	6360.6
	6504.3
	6513.1
	6656.4
	6903.2
	6851.5
	3Nonfinancial corporate business; mutual fund shares; asset
	LM103064203
	234.5
	235.7
	255.9
	228.3
	235.7
	238.1
	244.1
	254.5
	255.9
	4State and local governments, excluding employee retirement funds; mutual fund shares; asset
	LM213064203
	84.3
	86.5
	93.1
	82.9
	86.5
	87.0
	88.3
	91.0
	93.1
	5U.S.-chartered depository institutions; mutual fund shares; asset
	LM763064203
	59.7
	54.9
	58.0
	53.5
	54.9
	56.3
	57.7
	57.0
	58.0
	6Credit unions; mutual fund shares; asset
	LM473064205
	2.1
	1.9
	1.9
	2.1
	1.9
	1.9
	2.0
	2.0
	1.9
	7Property-casualty insurance companies; mutual fund shares; asset
	LM513064203
	18.2
	18.4
	18.8
	17.8
	18.4
	17.7
	17.9
	18.3
	18.8
	8Life insurance companies; mutual fund shares; asset
	LM543064205
	1701.9
	1633.5
	1686.2
	1590.9
	1633.5
	1621.5
	1638.0
	1684.5
	1686.2
	9Private pension funds; mutual fund shares; asset
	LM573064205
	3175.5
	3216.7
	3416.0
	3126.8
	3216.7
	3260.9
	3320.7
	3430.9
	3416.0
	10State and local government employee retirement funds; mutual fund shares; asset
	LM223064205
	540.5
	548.0
	572.0
	532.3
	548.0
	551.7
	557.6
	570.0
	572.0
	11Rest of the world; U.S. mutual fund shares; asset
	LM263064203
	607.8
	597.1
	662.1
	610.6
	597.1
	613.9
	626.0
	671.2
	662.1
	12 Back to top
  **NOTES** Shares of open-end investment companies; excludes shares of money market mutual funds and exchange-traded funds.
  Home Economic Research & Data
 Accessibility Contact Us Disclaimer Website Policies FOIA
 PDF Reader
Exhibit 23.2
 
 CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
 
 
 We hereby consent to incorporate by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Registration Nos. 333-156493 and 333-172305) of our report dated March 3, 2010 relating to the financial statements, financial statement schedule and effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of AgFeed Industries, Inc. (the “Company”) which appear in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December, 31 2010.
 
 
 /s/ Goldman Parks Kurland Mohidin LLP
 Goldman Parks Kurland Mohidin LLP
 Encino, California
 March 16, 2010
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 195 (Wednesday, October 11, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 70412]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-22468]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service

26 CFR Part 1

[REG-109348-22]
RIN 1545-BQ69


Identification of Monetized Installment Sale Transactions as 
Listed Transactions; Hearing Cancellation

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Cancellation of a notice of public hearing on a proposed 
rulemaking and notice of public hearing.

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

SUMMARY: This document cancels a public hearing on proposed regulations 
that would identify monetized installment sale transactions and 
substantially similar transactions as listed transactions, a type of 
reportable transaction.

DATES: The public hearing scheduled for October 12, 2023, at 10 a.m. ET 
is cancelled.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vivian Hayes of the Publications and 
Regulations Branch, Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and 
Administration) at (202) 317-6901 (not a toll-free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A notice of proposed rulemaking and a notice 
of public hearing that appeared in the Federal Register on August 4, 
2023 (88 FR 51756) announced that a public hearing being held in person 
and by teleconference was scheduled for October 12, 2023, at 10 a.m. 
ET. The subject of the public hearing is under 26 CFR part 1.
    The public comment period for these regulations expired on October 
3, 2023. The notice of proposed rulemaking and notice of public hearing 
instructed those interested in testifying at the public hearing to 
submit a request to testify and an outline of the topics to be 
addressed. We did not receive a request to testify at the Public 
Hearing. Therefore, the public hearing scheduled for October 12, 2023, 
at 10 a.m. ET is cancelled.

Oluwafunmilayo A. Taylor,
Section Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, Associate Chief 
Counsel (Procedure & Administration).
[FR Doc. 2023-22468 Filed 10-10-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
# Official Journal L 25I/2022

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 025I |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 654 February 2022 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 025I

English edition

Legislation

Volume 654 February 2022

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/156 of 4 February 2022 implementing Article 12(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1770 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Mali | 1 |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | * | Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/157 of 4 February 2022 amending Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/1775 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Mali | 7 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/156 of 4 February 2022 implementing Article 12(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1770 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Mali

1

DECISIONS

*

Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/157 of 4 February 2022 amending Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/1775 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Mali

7

| 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.
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Health and Human Services Health Resources and Services Administration
 AGENCY: Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Department of Health and Human Services.
 ACTION: Announcing funding supplement for Rural Health and Economic Development Analysis Program.
 SUMMARY: HRSA provided additional award funds to the Rural Health and Economic Development Analysis Program recipient to produce a research project that quantifies the relationships between health care and economic factors in rural communities.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karis Tyner, Federal Office of Rural Health Policy, HRSA, at 
                        *ktyner@hrsa.gov*
                         and (240) 645-5756.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Intended Recipient of the Award:*
                     The University of Kentucky. *Amount of Non-Competitive Award:*
                     One award for $250,000. *Project Period:*
                     September 1, 2023, to August 31, 2024. *CFDA Number:*
                     93.155. *Award Instrument:*
                     Supplement. *Authority:*
                     Social Security Act section 711(b) (42 U.S.C. 912(b)). Table 1—Recipient and Award Amount
Grant No.
Award recipient name
City, state
Supplemental
                             award amount5 U1ZRH33331
The University of Kentucky
Lexington, KY
$250,000
 *Justification:*
                     This funding will provide a one-time supplement to the University of Kentucky via the Rural Health and Economic Development Analysis Program with a budget period of September 2023 through August 2024. This supplement will allow the University of Kentucky to build on past and ongoing projects supported by HRSA to improve health care in rural areas by advancing the knowledge base regarding the economic impacts of local health care sectors on rural economies. Carole Johnson, Administrator.


[FR Doc. 2023-22814 Filed 10-16-23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4165-15-P
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

MIDDLE DISTRICT 

IN RE: JOHN MARSHALL PAYNE III 

PETITION OF: COMMONWEALTH OF 

PENNSYLVANIA 

:

:

:

:

:

No. 85 MAL 2016 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 3rd day of August, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED. 

Justices Donohue and Mundy did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.
Exhibit 3.1
 ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT AND RESTATEMENT
OF SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED
ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION
OF
CARIBOU COFFEE COMPANY, INC.
 1.
    
    The name of the corporation is Caribou Coffee Company, Inc., a Minnesota corporation
(the Corporation).2.
    
    The document attached hereto as Exhibit A contains the full text of the Third
Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of the Corporation.3.
    
    The Third Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation were adopted by the
shareholders of the Corporation at a special meeting of shareholders held on August 29,
2005, and pursuant to Chapter 302A of the Minnesota Business Corporation Act.
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF
 /s/ Michael J. ColesMichael J. ColesChief Executive Officer,
President and Chairman of the Board




---



##### 



Exhibit A
 THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED
ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION
OF
CARIBOU COFFEE COMPANY, INC.
  ARTICLE I
NAME
  ARTICLE II
REGISTERED OFFICE
  ARTICLE III
AUTHORIZED SHARES
 Authorized Capital Stock
 Authority Relative to Preferred Stock
 Issuance of One Class or Series to Holders of Another
 -2-




---



##### 



ARTICLE IV
NO CUMULATIVE VOTING
  ARTICLE V
NO PREEMPTIVE RIGHTS
  ARTICLE VI
ACTION IN WRITING IN LIEU OF A MEETING
  ARTICLE VII
LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
  -3-




---



##### 



ARTICLE VIII
CONTROL SHARE ACQUISITIONS
  -4-