alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

JAMES REEVES, III : CIVIL ACTION

:

 v. :

:

CITY OF PHILADELPHIA POLICE :

DEPARTMENT, et al. : NO. 02-4428

 ORDER

AND NOW, this 11th day of February, 2003, upon

consideration of a proffered stipulation that plaintiff's counsel

submitted to the Clerk of this Court upon a caption of the Court

of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County (though bearing the names

of the parties in this action), and such counsel therefore being

apparently confused as to which Court or action she intends to

file her stipulation, it is hereby ORDERED that the Clerk shall

not docket the attached stipulation, but shall RETURN it to

plaintiff's counsel.

BY THE COURT:

 ______________________________

 Stewart Dalzell, J.

Case 2:02-cv-04428-SD Document 14 Filed 02/11/2003 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 11



STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION

OF PER SHARE
EARNINGS



|                                            |  |            |  |                               |  | SHARES   
|------------------------------------------- |  | ---------- |  | ----------------------------- |  | ---------
|Basic Shares outstanding at June 30, 2003   |  |            |  |                               |  | 1,846,697
|                                            |  |            |  |                               |  |          
|Net (loss) after tax                        |  | $(665,402) |  | =            $(.36) per share
|Basic Shares outstanding                    |  | 1,846,697  |  |                               |  |          
|Diluted Shares outstanding at June 30, 2003 |  |            |  |                               |  | 1,915,182
|                                            |  |            |  |                               |  |          
|Net (loss) after tax                        |  | $(665,402) |  | =            $(.35) per share
|Diluted Shares outstanding                  |  | 1,915,182  |  |                               |  |          



| | Note: |  | Basic earnings per share is computed as earnings divided by weighted average basic shares outstanding. When a loss occurs, Diluted (loss) per share and Basic (loss) per share are
the same.
| | ----- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. 53547.

protests 139959-K, etc. (Ogdensburg).

#### F. W. Myers & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

The uncontradicted evidence conclusively established that the humane cattle killer and parts thereof are similar in all material respects to those the subject of *F. W. Myers & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(21 Cust. Ct. 145, C. D. 1145). The claim of the plaintiff was therefore sustained. •
<PAGE>   1










                     CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
                      --------------------------------



We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Prospectuses
constituting part of the Registration Statements on Form S-8 pertaining to the
1997 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (No. 333-28799), 1997 Non-employee Directors
Stock Plan (No. 333-24439), Long-term Performance Based Incentive Plan (No.
333-24441) and the 1997 Employee Incentive Stock Plan (No. 333-24437) and on
Form S-3 pertaining to Debt Securities; Preferred Stock; Common Stock; Warrants
to Purchase Debt Securities, Preferred Stock and Common Stock; Stock Purchase
Contracts; and Stock Purchase Units (No. 333-31619) of SunAmerica Inc. of our
report dated November 7, 1997 appearing on page F-2 of this Form 10-K.  We also
consent to the incorporation by reference of our report on the Financial
Statement Schedules, which appears on page S-2 of this Form 10-K.





Price Waterhouse LLP
Los Angeles, California
December 10, 1997
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                                   AS ADDED BY
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Clifton Savings Bancorp,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), the
undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as added by
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         (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 the Company as of and for the period covered by
                  the Report.



                                       /s/ John A. Celentano, Jr.
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       John A. Celentano, Jr.
                                       Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive
                                       Officer


                                       /s/ Christine R. Piano
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Christine R. Piano
                                       Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer


Date: November 6, 2009
```
Social Security: Increasing Number of Disability Claims and Deteriorating
Service (Chapter Report, 11/10/93, GAO/HRD-94-11).

The administration of the Social Security Administration's (SSA)
disability programs has reached a crisis stage; service is poor and
billions of dollars in payments will end up going to ineligible persons
unless mandated continuing disability reviews are resumed.  Claim
backlogs and processing times for SSA's disability insurance and
supplemental security income programs hit an all-time high in fiscal
year 1992.  The two programs have been unable to keep up with the high
rate of claims for benefits, a trend that has continued into fiscal year
1993.  Processing times have increased nearly 50 percent in recent
years, and some states take more than five months to process claims. SSA
has undertaken many short-term initiatives to keep up with claims--most
significantly, the funding of overtime for disability determination
services.  According to administrators, staff are overworked and
overtime is at record levels.  SSA has also diverted staff from doing
continuing disability reviews to processing initial claims.  As a
result, many ineligible persons are receiving program benefits at a cost
of at least $1.4 billion.  These short-term initiatives have only
slightly reduced pending claims and processing times.  SSA also has
several long-term initiatives under way to improve its disability
programs; exactly how, when, and to what extent these initiatives will
improve service is unknown at this point, however.

--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------

 REPORTNUM:  HRD-94-11
     TITLE:  Social Security: Increasing Number of Disability Claims and 
             Deteriorating Service
      DATE:  11/10/93
   SUBJECT:  Social security benefits
             Disability insurance
             State-administered programs
             Disability benefits
             Productivity
             Compensation claims
             Claims processing
             Eligibility determinations
             Supplemental security income program
             Computerized information systems
IDENTIFIER:  Social Security Program
             Social Security Disability Insurance Program
             
************************************************************************

We regret that the full text of this item is presently unavailable.

See the GAO FAQ - Section 2.0 for printed copy ordering information.
The FAQ is automatically retrieved with all WAIS search results or 
can be obtained by sending e-mail to: [email protected]
```
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4591 

To permanently authorize the exemption of aliens working as fish processors 

from the numerical limitation on H–2B nonimmigrant visas. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 18, 2024 

Ms. MURKOWSKI (for herself, Mr. KAINE, Mr. WARNER, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. 

VAN HOLLEN, Mr. CARDIN, Mr. CASSIDY, and Mr. TILLIS) introduced 

the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee 

on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To permanently authorize the exemption of aliens working 

as fish processors from the numerical limitation on H– 

2B nonimmigrant visas. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Save Our Seafood 

5 Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 4591 IS

1 SEC. 2. EXEMPTION OF ALIENS WORKING AS FISH PROC2 ESSORS FROM THE NUMERICAL LIMITATION 

3 ON H–2B NONIMMIGRANT VISAS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 214(g)(10) of the Immi5 gration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(10)) is 

6 amended— 

7 (1) by striking ‘‘The numerical limitations of 

8 paragraph (1)(B)’’ and inserting ‘‘(A) The numer9 ical limitation under paragraph (1)(B)’’; and 

10 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

11 ‘‘(B)(i) The numerical limitation under paragraph 

12 (1)(B) shall not apply to any nonimmigrant alien issued 

13 a visa or otherwise provided status under section 

14 101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b) who is employed (or has received an 

15 offer of employment)— 

16 ‘‘(I) as a fish roe processor, a fish roe techni17 cian, or a supervisor of fish roe processing; or 

18 ‘‘(II) as a fish processor. 

19 ‘‘(ii) As used in clause (i)— 

20 ‘‘(I) the term ‘fish’ means fresh or saltwater 

21 finfish, mollusks, crustaceans, and all other forms of 

22 aquatic animal life, including the roe of such ani23 mals, other than marine mammals and birds; and 

24 ‘‘(II) the term ‘processor’— 

25 ‘‘(aa) means any person engaged in the 

26 processing of fish, including handling, storing, 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•S 4591 IS

1 preparing, heading, eviscerating, shucking, 

2 freezing, changing into different market forms, 

3 manufacturing, preserving, packing, labeling, 

4 dockside unloading, holding, and all other proc5 essing activities; and 

6 ‘‘(bb) does not include any person engaged 

7 in— 

8 ‘‘(AA) harvesting or transporting fish 

9 or fishery products without otherwise en10 gaging in processing; 

11 ‘‘(BB) practices such as heading, evis12 cerating, or freezing intended solely to pre13 pare a fish for holding on board a harvest 

14 vessel; or 

15 ‘‘(CC) operating a retail establish16 ment.’’. 

17 (b) REPEAL.—Section 14006 of the Department of 

18 Defense Appropriations Act, 2005 (Public Law 108–287) 

19 is repealed. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
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 of Atlas America Public #12-2003 Limited
Partnership (the "Partnership") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2008
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Freddie M. Kotek, Chief Executive Officer of the Managing General
Partner, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(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 the
      Partnership.





By:
            /s/ Freddie M.
      KotekName:
            Freddie
      M. KotekTitle:
            Chief
      Executive Officer of the Managing General PartnerDate:
            August
      12, 2008
No. 58554.

protests 207197-K, etc. (New York).

#### Munson G. Shaw Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *R. C. Williams & Co., Inc.*(40 C. C. P. A. 130, C. A. D. 508) and *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
# EUR-Lex - 52007AP0002 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 52007AP0002

**European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council decision concerning the conclusion of the Agreement amending the Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States, of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part, signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000 (6987/2006 - C6-0124/2006 - 2005/0071(AVC)) **

*
Official Journal 244 E , 18/10/2007 P. 0118 - 0119 *

P6_TA(2007)0002

Agreement amending the Partnership Agreement between the ACP countries and the EC and its Member States ***

European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council decision concerning the conclusion of the Agreement amending the Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States, of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part, signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000 (6987/2006 — C6-0124/2006 — 2005/0071(AVC))

(Assent procedure)

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the draft Council decision (6987/2006) [1],

- having regard to the draft agreement amending the Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States, of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part, signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000,

- having regard to the request for assent submitted by the Council pursuant to Article 300(3), second subparagraph, in conjunction with Article 310 of the EC Treaty (C6-0124/2006),

- having regard to Rules 75 and 83(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Development and the opinion of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A6-0469/2006),

1. Gives its assent to the conclusion of the Agreement;

2. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission, and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the African, Caribbean and Pacific States.

[1] Not yet published in OJ.

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RICKY HAMMONDS, No. CIV-S-04-0909 MCE/GGH P

Plaintiff, 

v. ORDER

I. REYES, ET AL., 

Defendants.

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed

this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local General Order No.

262.

On October 6, 2005, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and

Recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which

contained notice to all parties that any objections to the

Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within twenty days.

///

Case 2:04-cv-00909-MCE -GGH Document 60 Filed 12/15/05 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

2

Neither party has filed objections to the Findings and

Recommendations.

The Court has reviewed the file and finds the Findings and

Recommendations to be supported by the record and by the

Magistrate Judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED

that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations filed October 6, 2005

are adopted in full; and 

2. Defendants’ August 8, 2005, Summary Judgment Motion is

denied.

DATED: December 14, 2005

_____________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-00909-MCE -GGH Document 60 Filed 12/15/05 Page 2 of 2
# EUR-Lex - 52007AP0149 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 52007AP0149

**European Parliament legislative resolution of 25 April 2007 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on port State control (recast version) (COM(2005)0588 - C6-0028/2006 - 2005/0238(COD)) **

*
Official Journal 074 E , 20/03/2008 P. 0584 - 0584 *

P6_TA(2007)0149

Port State control ***I

European Parliament legislative resolution of 25 April 2007 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on port State control (recast version) (COM(2005)0588 — C6-0028/2006 — 2005/0238(COD))

(Codecision procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2005)0588) [1],

- having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 80(2) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C6-0028/2006),

- having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the report of the Committee on Transport and Tourism and the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A6-0081/2007);

1. Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.

[1] Not yet published in OJ.

--------------------------------------------------
Before the First Division,

July 7, 1943

No. 48512.

#### Protest 999975-G of Eitinger Bead Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise is similar to that the subject of Abstract 47816, the claim at 25 percent under paragraph 1503 and T. D. 49458 was sustained.
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee v ROBERT YATSKO, Corporal, U. S. Marine Corps, Appellant

19 USCMA 57, 41 CMR 57

No. 22,357

November 7, 1969

*Captain Frank A. Nelson,*JAGO, USN, was on the pleadings for Appellant, Accused.

*Colonel C. B. Larouehe,*USMC, and *Lieutenant Thomas F. Bastow,*JAGC, USNR, were on the pleadings for Appellee, United States.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam:

Among other offenses, the accused was convicted of one alleging that “being the driver of a vehicle at the time of an accident” he did “wrongfully and unlawfully leave the scene of the accident without making his identity known.” The allegations are the same, except for use of the word “accident” for “collision,” as those before us in United States v Fleig, 16 USCMA 444, 37 CMR 64. We held in *Fleig*that an essential element of a charge of hit- and-run, the offense intended by the specification, is that “the accused’s vehicle be involved in the collision from the scene of which he fled.” *Id.,*at page 445. We further held that the quoted allegations did not fairly imply that the accused’s vehicle was involved in the accident, and, therefore, affirmed the decision of the board of review which held the specification insufficient as a matter of law. Accordingly, the findings of guilty of Charge III, specification 2, are set aside and the charge is ordered dismissed.

The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy for submission to the Court of Military Review for redetermination of the sentence on the basis of the remaining findings of guilty.
(Reap. Dec. 8515)

#### J. D. Smith Inter-Ocean, Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 972404.

(Decided January 12, 1956)

*Siegel, Mandell & Davidson*for the plaintiff.

*Warren E. Burger,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Olivee, Chief Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, subject to the approval of the Court, that the market value or price at time of exportation of cameras and cases covered by the invoice and entry noted above at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale for home consumption to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, including all costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition packed ready for shipment to the United States was 32.30 Deutsch Marks, net packed for the cameras and 5.60 Deutsch Marks, net packed for the eases, and that there was *502no higher export value for such or similar merchandise herein at the time of exportation thereof.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that this case may be submitted on the foregoing stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the foreign value, as that value is defined in section 402 (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by section 8 of the Customs Administrative Act of 1938, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such value was 32.30 deutschemarks, each, net packed for the cameras and 5.60 deutschemarks, each, net packed for the cases.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
(Reap. Dec. 10735)

#### Kurt Orban Company, Inc. *v.*United States

Entry Nos. 60; 86.

(Decided April 28, 1964)

*Sharretts, Paley*<6 *Carter*for tbe plaintiff.

*John W. Douglas,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Oliver, Chief Judge:

These two appeals for reappraisement are before me for decision on a written stipulation, reading as follows:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by counsel for tbe parties hereto:

> That tbe merchandise covered by the appeals to reappraisement enumerated above consists of wire strand exported from Japan during tbe period beginning July 27, 1960 and ending August 25, 1960; that wire strand is not identified in tbe Final List published by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, T.D. 54521, effective February 27, 1958; that on or immediately preceding the date of exportation of each shipment of wire strand covered by each of the appeals to reappraisement enumerated above, the prices at which wire strand, such as or similar to the wire strand described on the invoices covered by the instant appeals to reappraisement were freely sold, or in the absence of sales, offered for sale in the principal market of Japan in the usual wholesale quantity and in the ordinary course of trade for exporta*536tion to the United States, including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other expenses incidental to placing the merchandise in condition, packed, ready for shipment to the United States, was $252. per metric ton for wire strand of %g inch diameter (United States funds).

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the appeals to reap-praisement enumerated above are submitted for decision upon this stipulation and the entry file covered by each appeal.

On the agreed facts, I find that the proper basis for appraisement of the merchandise in question is export value, as defined in section 402 (b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and that such statutory value therefor is $252 per metric ton for wire strand of %6-inch diameter (United States funds).

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.