alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
GUIDANCE REGARDING THE 

USE OF RACE 

BY FEDERAL LAW 

ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES 

U.S. Department of Justice 

Civil Rights Division 

June 2003 

In his February 27, 2001, Address to a Joint 

Session of Congress, President George W. 

Bush declared that racial profiling is “wrong 

and we will end it in America.” He directed 

the Attorney General to review the use by 

Federal law enforcement authorities of race 

as a factor in conducting stops, searches and 

other law enforcement investigative 

procedures. The Attorney General, in turn, 

instructed the Civil Rights Division to 

develop guidance for Federal officials to 

ensure an end to racial profiling in law 

enforcement. 

“Racial profiling” at its core concerns the 

invidious use of race or ethnicity as a 

criterion in conducting stops, searches and 

other law enforcement investigative 

procedures. It is premised on the erroneous 

assumption that any particular individual of 

one race or ethnicity is more likely to 

engage in misconduct than any particular 

individual of another race or ethnicity. 

Racial profiling in law enforcement is not 

merely wrong, but also ineffective. Racebased assumptions in law enforcement 

perpetuate negative racial stereotypes that 

are harmful to our rich and diverse 

democracy, and materially impair our efforts 

to maintain a fair and just society. 

The use of race as the basis for law 

enforcement decision-making clearly has a 

terrible cost, both to the individuals who 

suffer invidious discrimination and to the 

Nation, whose goal of “liberty and justice 

for all” recedes with every act of such 

discrimination. For this reason, this 

guidance in many cases imposes more 

restrictions on the consideration of race and 

ethnicity in Federal law enforcement than 

the Constitution requires. This guidance 

prohibits racial profiling in law enforcement 

practices without hindering the important 

work of our Nation's public safety officials, 

particularly the intensified anti-terrorism 

efforts precipitated by the events of 

September 11, 2001. 

THE FULL TEXT CAN BE 

FOUND ON THE LEGAL 

DIVISION WEB PAGE BY 

CLICKING THE LINK BELOW. 

http://www.fletc.gov/legal/legal_home.htm
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-6246

VICTOR TOWNES,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

CITY OF BALTIMORE; UNKNOWN BALTIMORE CITY UNIFORM, and Possible Plainclothes Police Officers and their Superiors; UNKNOWN BALTIMORE

FIRE & AMBULANCE SERVICE ATTENDANTS; UNKNOWN

FIELD DIRECTORS OF THE BALTIMORE F.B.I.

OFFICE; BALTIMORE CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT;

UNKNOWN BALTIMORE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER;

UNKNOWN COMMISSIONER FOR THE BALTIMORE CITY

FIRE AND AMBULANCE SERVICES; VAUGHN FOREMAN,

Trooper; SAMUEL N. WICHNER, Special Agent,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge. (CA95-3529-WMN)

Submitted: May 1, 1997 Decided: May 13, 1997

Before WIDENER and MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Victor Townes, Appellant Pro Se. Frank Charles Derr, Assistant

City Solicitor, William Rowe Phelan, Jr., OFFICE OF THE CITY

SOLICITOR, Baltimore, Maryland; Charles Joseph Peters, Sr., OFFICE

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland; Duane Anthony
2

Verderaime, BALTIMORE CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT, Baltimore, Maryland;

John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland;

Donald E. Hoffman, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND,

Pikesville, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals a district court order dismissing some, but

not all, parties from his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) action. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is nondispositive as to the entire action and therefore not appealable.

This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28

U.S.C. § 1291 (1994), and certain interlocutory and collateral

orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1994); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v.

Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order here

appealed is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory

or collateral order.

We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
3
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 70 (Tuesday, April 12, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20434-20435]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8696]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

Notice of Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience and 
Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits Filed Under Subpart B 
(Formerly Subpart Q) During the Week Ending March 19, 2011

    The following Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience 
and Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits were filed under subpart 
B (formerly subpart Q) of the Department of Transportation's Procedural 
Regulations (See 14 CFR 301.201 et. seq.). The due date for Answers, 
Conforming Applications, or Motions to Modify Scope are set forth below 
for each application. Following the Answer period DOT may process the 
application by expedited procedures. Such procedures may consist of the 
adoption of a show-cause order, a tentative order, or in appropriate 
cases a final order without further proceedings.
    Docket Number: DOT-OST-2011-0051.
    Date Filed: March 17, 2011.
    Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion to Modify 
Scope: April 7, 2011.
    Description: Joint application of Southwest Airlines Co. and 
AirTran Airways, Inc. requesting approval of the de facto route 
transfer that will result from Southwest's acquisition of AirTran.
    Docket Number: DOT-OST-2008-0062.
    Date Filed: March 18, 2011.
    Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion to Modify 
Scope: April 8, 2011.
    Description: Application of XL Airways France requesting renewal of 
its exemption authority to engage in: (i) Foreign scheduled and charter 
air transportation of persons, property and mail from any point or 
points behind any Member State of the European Union via any point or 
points in any Member State and via intermediate points to any point or 
points in the United States and beyond; (ii) foreign scheduled and 
charter air transportation of persons, property, and mail between any 
point or points in the United States and any point or points in any 
member of the European Common Aviation Area; (iii) foreign scheduled 
and charter cargo air transportation between any point or points in the 
United States and any other point or points; (iv) other charters 
pursuant to the prior approval requirements; and (v) transportation 
authorized by any additional route

[[Page 20435]]

rights made available to European Community carriers in the future. XL 
Airways France further requests issuance of a foreign air carrier 
permit to enable XL Airways France to engage in the same foreign air 
transportation described above.

Renee V. Wright,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison.
[FR Doc. 2011-8696 Filed 4-11-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P
```
Exhibit 12

                    KANSAS GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY
          Computations of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                        (Dollars in Thousands)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                         Year Ended December 31,
                                        1999         1998         1997         1996         1995
<S>                                   <C>          <C>          <C>          <C>          <C>
Earnings from
  continuing operations . . . . . .   $119,248     $148,736     $ 69,536     $132,532     $162,660

Fixed Charges:
  Interest expense. . . . . . . . .     49,518       49,358       50,450       58,062       52,263
  Interest on Corporate-owned
    Life Insurance Borrowings . . .     31,450       32,368       31,253       27,636       25,357
  Interest Applicable to Rentals. .     24,626       25,106       25,143       25,539       25,375
      Total Fixed Charges . . . . .    105,594      106,832      106,846      111,237      102,995

Earnings (1). . . . . . . . . . . .   $224,842     $255,568     $176,382     $243,769     $265,655

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges.       2.13         2.39         1.65         2.19         2.58




     (1)  Earnings are deemed to consist of net income to which has been added income taxes (including net
     deferred  investment  tax  credit)  and  fixed  charges.  Fixed  charges consist of all interest on
     indebtedness, amortization  of debt  discount  and  expense, and the portion of rental expense which
     represents an interest factor.

</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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LARRY JOSEPH THOMAS,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-0733 MCE DAD P

vs.

A.K. SCRIBNER, Warden, et al.,

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with an amended petition for a writ

of habeas corpus. On September 21, 2006, the District Judge adopted findings and

recommendations recommending that respondents’ motion to dismiss be denied and that

respondents file their answer to the amended petition.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within forty-five days from the date

of this order respondents’ shall file their answer to the amended petition for a writ of habeas

corpus, filed on April 29, 2004. 

DATED: September 27, 2006.

DAD:4

thom0733.ans

Case 2:04-cv-00733-MCE -DAD Document 65 Filed 09/28/06 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF HORIZON MEDICAL PRODUCTS INC. FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED
SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                         652,745
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               18,183,144
<ALLOWANCES>                                (1,191,663)
<INVENTORY>                                 20,264,740
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            42,332,962
<PP&E>                                       5,551,877
<DEPRECIATION>                              (2,188,448)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             100,592,161
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       57,981,490
<BONDS>                                        666,390
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        13,366
<OTHER-SE>                                  40,885,578
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               100,592,161
<SALES>                                     49,579,009
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            49,579,009
<CGS>                                       32,897,319
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               32,897,319
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            14,415,108
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           3,964,600
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (1,679,493)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (445,240)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (1,234,253)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (1,234,253)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.09)


</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                  EXHIBIT 11 (a)



IRWIN FINANCIAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
EXHIBIT 11(a) - COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

       Year Ended December 31,                        1999               1998             1997
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                             <C>                 <C>               <C>
AVERAGE NUMBER OF SHARES OUTSTANDING                   21,530             21,732           22,326
                                                 ============        ===========       ==========

NET INCOME                                       $     33,156        $    30,503       $   24,444
                                                 ============        ===========       ==========

BASIC EARNINGS PER SHARE (Note 2)                $       1.54        $      1.40       $     1.10
                                                 ============        ===========       ==========




DILUTED SHARES OUTSTANDING:
  Average number of shares outstanding                 21,530             21,732           22,326
  Assumed exercise of stock options (Note 1)              356                407              396
                                                 ------------        -----------       ----------
  Total shares (Note 2)                                21,886             22,139           22,722
                                                 ============        ===========       ==========


NET INCOME                                       $     33,156        $    30,503       $   24,444
                                                 ============        ===========       ==========

DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE (Note 2)              $       1.51        $      1.38       $     1.08
                                                 ============        ===========       ==========

</TABLE>



(1) The dilutive effect of stock options is based on the Treasury Stock method.

(2)  Adjusted for the two-for-one stock split on May 27, 1998


                                      108
Bureau of the Fiscal Service

1

OTCnet Printable Job Aid

Credit Card Refunds

To complete a credit card refund, complete the following steps:

1. Click Card Processing>Card Transaction Query.

2. The Card Processing—Query Card Transaction History page appears. Enter your search 

criteria. Click Search.

3. The Search Results table appears. Click the Invoice ID hyperlink of the card transaction 

details you wish to view.

4. The View Card Transaction History Details page displays the card transaction history details 

as shown in Figure 1. Review the details of the selected transaction record. Click Refund 

Transaction. 

Figure 1: View Card Transaction History Details, Click Refund Transaction

Click Print Sale Receipt to print a receipt for the original transaction.

5. A Refund Transaction dialog box appears. Click OK. On the View Card Transaction History 

Details page, the Refund in Progress message appears.

6. The Refund Transaction dialog box appears, stating the transaction was successful. Click 

Close.

Application Tip
Bureau of the Fiscal Service

2

OTCnet Printable Job Aid

• If a customer requests a receipt, click Print Refund Receipt before clicking Close.

• Once the transaction is refunded, Refund Transition is no longer visible on the View 

Card Transaction History Details page.

• Once a refund has been issued, the customer cannot reprint a receipt for the original 

sale transaction, from this screen. You can query the transaction again, search for 

Processed transactions and Print Sale Receipt.

• Click Print Sales Receipt to print a paper receipt.

• Click Previous to return to the previous page.

• Click Return Home to return to the OTCnet Home Page.

7. To reprint an approved payment receipt for credit cards, click Print Refund Receipt from 

the View Card Transaction History Details page.

Application Tips

Additional Buttons
EXHIBIT 99.2

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Judiciary Plaza
Washington, D.C. 20549

Ladies and Gentlemen:

In a letter dated March 25, 2002, our independent public
accountants, Arthur Andersen LLP ("Andersen"), represented to us
that their audit of the consolidated financial statements of IES
Utilities Inc. (name changed to Interstate Power and Light
Company effective January 1, 2002) and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 2001 and for the year then ended was subject to
Andersen's quality control system for the U.S. accounting and
auditing practice to provide reasonable assurance that their
engagement was conducted in compliance with professional
standards and that there was appropriate continuity of Andersen
personnel working on the audit and availability of national
office consultation.  Availability of personnel at foreign
affiliates of Andersen is not relevant to this audit.




INTERSTATE POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY


By:      /s/ John E. Kratchmer
         ---------------------
Name:        John E. Kratchmer
Title:       Corporate Controller and Chief Accounting Officer


March 25, 2002
August 8, 2016

Mr. Pat Haberman

Brewster Fresh Produce
16556 Wass Avenue

Brewster

, MN 56119

Re: FAA

– 2016

– 4931

Dear Mr. Haberman :

This letter is to provide notification that we have reviewed your petition for exemption, and have determined that we will continue to process your petition.

As referenced in the June 22, 2016, letter posted to your docket at www.regulations.gov

, we are reviewing pending Section 333 petitions to determine if the recently

- issued regulation, Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems, Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 107 ( www.faa.gov/uas ) will satisfy your request

. We have determined that

y our request requires further regulatory relief (Tier 3), and we will continue working on your petition for exemption

.

We have found that your petition, if granted, would set a precedent. Therefore, we will publish a summary of your petition in the Federal Register for public comments , if we have not done so already.

We will advise you of the agency’s final decision on your petition as soon as possible. If you have any questions regarding your petition, please contact me at 333exemptions@faa.gov

.

Sincerely,

/s/
Brenda Robeson Program A nalyst
From: Mike Strmiska <mikestrmiska@yahoo.com>

To: "dpr12001@cdpr.ca.gov" <dpr12001@cdpr.ca.gov>

CC: Nick Higgins <NN/AHiggins@dow.com>

Date: 5/31/2012 7:37 AM

Subject: Low VOC Issue between Goal Tender and Goal 2xl

Dear Linda Orokawa-Otani, 

For IPM and Sustainable Ag reasons I integrate the use of Goal Tender and Goal 2xl. I regularly use the newer low 

VOC types of pesticides, whenever possible. There are times they simply are not effective.

I have been and independant PCA for 32 years, caring for some of the largest almond and pistachio growers in our 

valley. I am very sensitive to our environment, crop safety, and growers success. I am a great cooperator with our 

Counties, UC Extension Service, and the USDA-ARS. If you would like references, I can provide them.

Goal Tender is a great pre-emergent, but poor contact herbicide. I use it mostly in the late winter/spring--January to 

bloom, and again in April. During the summer months, the weeds quickly become large due to the limited number of

spray days due to the seasonal winds. I use Goal 2xl at 1 quart and Glyphosphate in combination. Generally, I apply 

it twice each summer. Goal Tender does not control medium to large weeds, and unfortunately, they are a common 

battle during our summers.

I think it would be sad to load-up the tank with several herbicides to do the same job that a low rate of Goal 2xl 

does. It goes against the wisdom employed from the entire IPM and Sustainable Ag logic. It would increase total 

pounds of pesticides applied to our crops and environment. Plus, the grower costs would increase significantly.

Here's an idea that I believe could be a happy medium.....put a maximum use rate of the Goal 2xl during the May to 

October time frame of 2 quarts per acre. I think most good PCA's could make that work.

Regarding the proposed paperwork additions, that's just what we ALL need--more paperwork in our businesses. A 

better idea is to include your requirement on the County Restricted Materials permit. All recommendations are 

already available through our Counties, and should be easily retrievable by DPR. Please try to help us all remain in 

business in this overly regulated state. Education is the best answer, not regulation. If I can help in any way, please 

let me know!

 Kindest regards,

 Mike Strmiska Consulting

 Mikestrmiska@yahoo.com

559-280-7777
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1999
<CASH>                                             889
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   889
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     889
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          185,794
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       749,950
<OTHER-SE>                                   (934,855)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       889
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                17,359
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,323
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (26,682)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (26,682)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (26,682)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.06)


</TABLE>