alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 46161.

#### Protest 3703-K of T. Saji Co. (Los Angeles).

*236Opinion by

Tilson, J.

Counsel agreed at the trial that the handbags are composed in chief value of cotton. In accordance therewith and in view of the appraiser’s testimony the court found that the evidence was not sufficient to overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the action of the collector. The protest was therefore overruled. .
No. 59030.

protests 246179-K and 246180-K (New York).

#### Judson Sheldon Division and National Carloading Corp. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

An examination of the record failing to disclose evidence of compliance with the regulations covering free entry of American merchandise, the protests were overruled, following *Maple Leaf Petroleum, Ltd.*v. *United States*(25 C. C. P. A. 5, T. D. 48976).
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6520

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JOSEPH BARRETT, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CR-98-468-A) Submitted: October 26, 2000 Decided: November 1, 2000 Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joseph Barrett, Appellant Pro Se. Jack I. Hanly, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on March 23, 2000, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on March 28, 2000. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986). 2 PER CURIAM: Joseph Barrett appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion to modify and amend his sentence. Under 18 U.S.C.A. § 3582(c)(1)(B) (West 1985 & Supp. 2000), the court may not modify a term of imprisonment once it has been imposed except in very narrow circumstances not applicable here. We have reviewed the record andthe district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Barrett , No. CR-98-468-A (E.D. Va. Mar. 28, 2000). * 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.

AFFIRMED
**Exhibit 31.1**
**CERTIFICATIONS**
I, Curtis J. Clawson, certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of HLI OperatingCompany, Inc.;
     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
     a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;
     b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
     c. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case ofan annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and
     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
     a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and
     b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting.
/s/ CURTIS J. CLAWSON
### In The C ou rt o f A p p ea ls Si x t h Appe l l at e Di st r i c t o f Te x as a t Te x ar ka na

______________________________ No . 0 6- 09 -0 00 98 -C V

______________________________ I N THE I NTEREST OF K.D.F . AND K.D .F., CHIL DREN
On Appea l from the County Court at L aw Hopkins County , Texas Trial Court No. CV34378

B e f o r e M o r r i s s , C . J. , C a

rt e r an d M o s e l e y , JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Carte r2 MEMORANDUM OPI

NI ON Appellant has f

iled with this C ourt a motion to dismi ss the p en d i n gappea l in this matter, repr esentingto this C o urt that the par ties have r eac hed a f

ull and final settlement. In such a c ase, no re a l c ontr ov e rs y

e xists , a nd in t he a bs e nc e of a c ontr ov e rs y , th e a

pp e a l is moo t. We gra nt t he mot ion

and dis mis s th is a

pp e a l.
J ack Ca rter Justice Date Submitted: J anuar y 14, 2010 Date D ecide d: J anuar y 15, 2010
No. 49198.

#### Protest 104040-K of Barr Shipping Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

From an examination of the-papers in the case the protest was overruled.
Exhibit 31.1

Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Michael Strauss, certify that:

1.    I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of American Home
      Mortgage Investment Corp.;

2.    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement
      of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
      statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
      were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
      report;

3.    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
      information included in this report, fairly present in all material
      respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of
      the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.    The Registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
      establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
      defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Registrant
      and have:

      a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
         disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
         supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
         Registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to
         us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
         which this report is being prepared;

      b) evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant's disclosure controls and
         procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
         effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
         of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

      c) disclosed in this report any change in the Registrant's internal
         control over financial reporting that occurred during the Registrant's
         most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is
         reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrant's internal
         control over financial reporting; and

5.    The Registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on
      our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,
      to the Registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the Registrant's
      board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

      a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
         operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
         reasonably likely to adversely affect the Registrant's ability to
         record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

      b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
         employees who have a significant role in the Registrant's internal
         control over financial reporting.


/s/ Michael Strauss
-------------------
Michael Strauss
Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer and President
August 9, 2004
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

UMG RECORDINGS, INC.,

et al.,

 

Plaintiffs, No. CIV S-04-2611 FCD DAD

vs.

DISCO AZTECA DISTRIBUTORS, 

INC.,

Defendant. ORDER

 /

The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 636, et seq., and Local Rule 72-302. 

On July 18, 2006, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein

which were served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that any objections to

the findings and recommendations were to be filed within ten days. No objections to the findings

and recommendations have been filed.

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: 

///// 

Case 2:04-cv-02611-FCD-DAD Document 61 Filed 08/21/06 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

2

1. The findings and recommendations filed July 18, 2006, are adopted in full; and

2. Plaintiffs’ motion to strike the expert testimony of Mitch Holder is granted.

DATED:August 21, 2006

/s/ Frank C. Damrell Jr. 

FRANK C. DAMRELL JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-02611-FCD-DAD Document 61 Filed 08/21/06 Page 2 of 2
Before the Third Division,

September 1, 1944

No. 49692.

#### Protests 720790-G, etc., of Giacomo Foti, Inc., et al. (Philadelphia).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

It was stipulated that the cheese in question is similar in all material respects to the Reggiano cheese the subject of *Locatelli*v. *United States*(T. D. 49389), which record was incorporated herein. The protests were therefore sustained.
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM LAWSON,

NO. CIV. S-04-2307 LKK/DAD

Plaintiff,

v. ORDER RE DISPOSAL

DOCUMENTS AFTER

CITY OF STOCKTON, NOTIFICATION OF SETTLEMENT

Defendant.

 /

Counsel for defendant has informed the court that the parties

have settled the above-captioned case. The court now orders that

the dispositional documents disposing of the case be filed no later

than thirty (30) days from the effective date of this order.

All hearing dates heretofore set in this matter are hereby

VACATED.

////

////

////

////

Case 2:04-cv-02307-LKK -DAD Document 21 Filed 10/19/05 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

FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS ORDER MAY BE GROUNDS FOR THE

IMPOSITION OF SANCTIONS ON ANY AND ALL COUNSEL OR PARTIES WHO

CONTRIBUTED TO THE VIOLATION OF THIS ORDER.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: October 18, 2005.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON

SENIOR JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 2:04-cv-02307-LKK -DAD Document 21 Filed 10/19/05 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM BALANCE
SHEET AND INCOME STATEMENT AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   12-MOS  
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996             DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996             DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                               0                  43,219
<SECURITIES>                                         0                  30,242
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0                 102,992 
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0                 155,083
<PP&E>                                               0                  41,862
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0                  28,286
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0                 251,771
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0                  44,220
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                   7,008
<OTHER-SE>                                           0                 194,332
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0                 251,771
<SALES>                                        137,470                 505,982
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0                       0
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  124,329                 458,670
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   300                     741
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 151                     601
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 13,627                  48,737
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,939                  20,563
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,688                  28,173
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .11                     .40
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .11                     .40 
        

</TABLE>
REGULATORY EVALUATION

Directorate Identifier: 201o-NM-078-AD

Executive Order 12866: Could the AD be considered a"significant regulatory action"? YES () explain NO (X) DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures: Is the AD significant? YES () explain NO (X) Regulatory Flexibility Act: Will the AD have a significant economic impact on asubstantial number of small entities? YES () explain NO (X) Intrastate Aviation in Alaska: This AD could affect intrastate aviation inAlaska. Is itappropriate to include specific requirements for aircraft operated inAlaska, where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? YES () explain NO (X)
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4506 

To amend the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act to clarify reporting 

requirements for information relating to providers of training services. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 11, 2024 

Mr. TUBERVILLE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To amend the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act 

to clarify reporting requirements for information relating 

to providers of training services. 

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 ‘‘Workforce Data Access 

5 Transparency and Accountability Act’’ or the ‘‘Workforce 

6 DATA Act’’. 

7 SEC. 2. PERFORMANCE REPORTS. 

8 Section 116(d)(1) of the Workforce Innovation and 

9 Opportunity Act (29 U.S.C. 3141(d)(1)) is amended— 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 4506 IS

1 (1) by striking ‘‘Not later’’ and inserting the 

2 following: 

3 ‘‘(A) TEMPLATES.—Not later’’; and 

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

5 ‘‘(B) DATA COLLECTION ENTITY.—The en6 tity listed as the recommended data collection 

7 entity in Attachment II of the Training and 

8 Employment Guidance Letter WIOA No. 3–18, 

9 entitled ‘Eligible Training Provider (ETP) Re10 porting Guidance under the Workforce Innova11 tion and Opportunity Act (WIOA)’, issued by 

12 the Employment and Training Administration 

13 on August 31, 2018, shall conduct data collec14 tion for reports under paragraphs (2), (3), and 

15 (4). 

16 ‘‘(C) DATA.— 

17 ‘‘(i) UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION

18 DATA.—A State that receives an allotment 

19 under this subtitle shall facilitate access 

20 for local boards in the State to unemploy21 ment compensation data, at the individual 

22 level, for participants in training services, 

23 to enable the local boards to meet the re24 quirements of this section and section 122. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•S 4506 IS

1 ‘‘(ii) WAGE DATA.—A State that re2 ceives an allotment under this subtitle shall 

3 facilitate access for providers of training 

4 services in the State to wage data for par5 ticipants in training services, to enable the 

6 providers to meet the requirements of this 

7 section and section 122. 

8 ‘‘(iii) PRIVACY.—In facilitating access 

9 under this subparagraph, a State shall not 

10 reduce any protections required of or af11 forded by the State concerning the privacy 

12 of information on the individuals covered 

13 by the data involved.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1997             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                               0                  33,644
<SECURITIES>                                         0                   6,607
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0                 149,256
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0                 200,104
<PP&E>                                               0                  46,817
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0                  26,270
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0                 306,310
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0                  58,781
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                   6,656
<OTHER-SE>                                           0                 240,685
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0                 306,310
<SALES>                                        191,389                 654,395
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0                       0
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  169,402                 576,859
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   265                     814
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  11                     162
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 22,759                  80,605
<INCOME-TAX>                                     9,781                  34,656
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                    12,978                  45,949
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .20                     .70
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .19                     .68


</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of the Application of the Central Trust Company

Order granted.