alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

   Schedule of Year-To-Date Principal and Interest Distributions
                           to
                  Certificateholders

                                                                             Ending
Class                     Interest             Principal    Losses           Balance
<S>                  <C>               <C>             <C>                <C>
A-1                    2,293,391.51       1,700,878.49         0.00        197,799,121.51
A-2                    8,025,075.00               0.00         0.00        660,500,000.00
A-X                    1,522,650.64               0.00         0.00                  0.00
B                        660,130.00               0.00         0.00         52,600,000.00
C                        761,650.56               0.00         0.00         58,500,000.00
D                        195,309.11               0.00         0.00         14,700,000.00
E                        548,864.41               0.00         0.00         40,900,000.00
F                        275,103.18               0.00         0.00         20,500,000.00
G                        370,836.66               0.00         0.00         32,200,000.00
H                        269,490.00               0.00         0.00         23,400,000.00
J                        134,745.00               0.00         0.00         11,700,000.00
K                        134,745.00               0.00         0.00         11,700,000.00
L                        181,963.34               0.00         0.00         15,800,000.00
LR                             0.00               0.00         0.00                  0.00
M                        107,105.00               0.00         0.00          9,300,000.00
N                         81,768.34               0.00         0.00          7,100,000.00
O                        134,839.82               0.00         0.00         11,708,234.00
R                              0.00               0.00         0.00                  0.00
V-1                            0.00               0.00         0.00                  0.00
V-2                            0.00               0.00         0.00                  0.00


</TABLE>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SAMUEL KWAME AMANKRAH, 

Petitioner-Appellant, 

 v. 

F. X. CHAVEZ, 

Respondent-Appellee. 

No. 11-57060 

D.C. No. 5:11-cv-00701-CAS

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Christina A. Snyder, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 11, 2017**

Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Samuel Kwame Amankrah appeals pro se from the 

district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have 

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253. We review de novo the denial of a habeas 

corpus petition, see Fairbank v. Ayers, 650 F.3d 1243, 1250 (9th Cir. 2011), and 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

APR 20 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 11-57060 

we affirm.

Amankrah argues that the prosecutor made several remarks during closing 

argument that violated Amankrah’s Fifth Amendment right not to testify under

Griffin v. California, 380 U.S. 609, 615 (1965). The California Court of Appeal

analyzed the prosecutor’s entire closing argument and concluded that two of the 

comments were improper, but that the Griffin error was harmless under Chapman 

v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 24 (1967). The state court’s rejection of Amankrah’s 

claim was not contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, either Griffin or 

Chapman, nor an unreasonable determination of facts based on the evidence 

presented. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d); see also Davis v. Ayala, 135 S. Ct. 2187, 2199

(2015). Moreover, given the significant evidence of his guilt at trial, Amankrah 

has not shown that the prosecutor’s remarks had a “substantial and injurious effect 

or influence in determining the jury’s verdict.” Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U.S. 

619, 637 (1993) (internal quotations omitted); see also Davis, 135 S. Ct. at 2198.

Amankrah’s motion to present late new evidence is denied.

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 31.1

              CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO
                      SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

I, Scott Delbeck, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Wired Associates
     Solutions Inc.;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

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

4.   I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
     procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the
     registrant and have:

     a.   designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 quarterly
          report is being prepared;
     b.   evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
          and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
          this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
     c.   presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
          effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
          evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5.   I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the registrant's
     auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or
     persons performing the equivalent functions):

     a.   all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
          controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
          record, process, summarize and report financial data and have
          identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in
          internal controls; and
     b.   any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
          employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
          controls; and

6.   I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were
     significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could
     significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most
     recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to
     significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
13th day of June, 2007.


/s/ Scott Delbeck
---------------------------
Chief Executive Officer
No. 49224.

#### Protests 978409-G, etc., of E. W. J. Hearty, Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

At the trial it was stipulated between counsel that the issue is the same as that involved in *United States*v. *E. W. J. Hearty, Inc.*(31 C. C. P. A. 106, C. A. D. 257), the record in which case was incorporated herein. Certain of the items were therefore held dutiable upon the weight of the meat alone, as set forth in schedule attached to decision herein. The collector was directed to make refund of duties accordingly.
No. 52652.

protests 135063-K, . etc. (New York).

#### George Borgfeldt Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
##### 



EXHIBIT 31.2
 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER REQUIRED BY RULE 13A-14(a)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED, AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of Local.com Corporation;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(s) 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)) [language omitted pursuant to SEC Release 34-47086] 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)
    
    [Omitted pursuant to SEC Release 34-47986];c)
    
    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; andd)
    
    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 (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
report) 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(s) 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; andb)
    
    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.
 Date: August 7, 2007
    /s/ Douglas S. NormanDouglas S. NormanChief Financial Officer

(Principal Financial Officer)
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 467 Reported in Senate (RS)]

<DOC>

                                                        Calendar No. 60
118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 467

                          [Report No. 118-22]

To modify the age requirement for the Student Incentive Payment Program 
                    of the State maritime academies.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 16, 2023

Mr. Peters (for himself, Mr. Young, Mr. Cruz, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Braun, 
 Ms. Baldwin, and Mr. Markey) introduced the following bill; which was 
  read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
                             Transportation

                              May 10, 2023

              Reported by Ms. Cantwell, with an amendment
                  [Insert the part printed in italic]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To modify the age requirement for the Student Incentive Payment Program 
                    of the State maritime academies.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Changing Age-Determined Eligibility 
To Student Incentive Payments Act'' or the ``CADETS Act''.

SEC. 2. AGE REQUIREMENT FOR THE STUDENT INCENTIVE PAYMENT PROGRAM OF 
              THE STATE MARITIME ACADEMIES.

    Section 51509 of title 46, United States Code, is amended by adding 
at the end the following:
    ``(i) Age Requirement.--The Secretary may make an agreement under 
this section only with a qualified student who will meet the age 
requirement for enlistment or commission in the Navy Reserve at the 
time of graduation from the academy.''.
                                                        Calendar No. 60

118th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                 S. 467

                          [Report No. 118-22]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

To modify the age requirement for the Student Incentive Payment Program 
                    of the State maritime academies.

_______________________________________________________________________

                              May 10, 2023

                       Reported with an amendment
```
Electronic Other 

"Electronic Other" refers to the submission or correction of FAFSA data 

using the Electronic Data Exchange (EDE) process. With the FAFSA filer’s 

permission, a FAFSA can be submitted through a variety of software 

methods (e.g. a school’s third party servicer, a school’s mainframe 

computer, or a school’s proprietary software).
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published

and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-41245

Summary Calendar

 

MATHEW VARUGHESE,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR,

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, 

INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION

Defendant-Appellee.

 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:96-CV-427

 

September 25, 1998

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Mathew Varughese appeals the denial of his petition for a writ

of habeas corpus. Varughese contends that his counsel was

ineffective for not objecting to: argument made by the State

asking the jury to consider his race as a basis for his conviction,

testimony that his daughter wrote in her diary that he abused her,

and testimony regarding the bad character of Indian men. Varughese

also argues that his counsel was ineffective for failing to

interview the State’s expert or the defense expert about whether
2

the burns on his shirt were caused by a “flash fire” and for

failing to offer evidence that his fingers were burned in the fire.

The district court granted Varughese’s motion for certificate

of appealability (COA) concerning whether Varughese’s counsel’s

failure to object to argument made by the state asking the jury to

consider his race as a basis for his conviction prejudiced his

defense. Varughese in his brief to this court raises the

ineffectiveness-of-counsel issue, including matters for which the

district court denied COA. Varughese later submitted a letter to

this court specifically requesting that we consider all five

claimed deficiencies of trial counsel in our resolution of the

ineffective-assistance issue, rather than the single deficiency

certified by the district court. 

In this case there is some question as to whether a district

court, using the COA procedure, can divide a claim of ineffective

assistance into subparts for appellate review. There is also some

question as to whether, assuming the issue is divisible, Varughese

properly requested review of the issues that were not granted COA.

See United States v. Kimler, No. 97-20320, 1998 WL 442846, at 1

(5th Cir. Aug. 5, 1998); Lackey v. Johnson, 116 F.3d 149 (5th Cir.

1997). Nevertheless, we need not reach these questions because,

even if we were to consider all claims of ineffective assistance,

we would deny relief because these arguments are without merit. We

have carefully reviewed the record and the briefs, and, essentially

for reasons adopted by the district court concerning this issue, we
3

AFFIRM the district court’s judgment. See Varughese v. Johnson,

No. 4:96-CV-427 (E.D. Tex. Sep. 26, 1997)(unpublished).

AFFIRMED.
Document Headings

                    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 Transportation

###### Office of the Secretary 

          - [Docket No. OST-2003-15660] 

# AGENCY:

Office of the Secretary, DOT. 

# ACTION:

Notice; correction. 

# SUMMARY:

                        The Office of the Secretary published a document in the                         **Federal Register**                         on February 14, 2007, concerning a request for a renewal of a currently approved information collection. We are correcting the document as set forth below.                     

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Vivian Jones, Office of the Secretary, Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington,  DC 20590, (202) 366-0283. 

## Correction 

                        In the February 14, 2007,                         **Federal Register**                         [72 FR 7110-7111] correct the Estimated total burden on respondents. And add the Average Annual Burden per respondent to read:                     

*Estimated Number of Respondents:*                         26.                     

*Total Annual Response:*                         1380.                     

*Estimated Total Burden on Respondents:*                         4789.                     

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 5, 2007. 

John DiLuccio, 

Director, Resource Directorate. 

 [FR Doc. E7-4409 Filed 3-9-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910-62-P
RE: Official Copies of Statutory Provisions Included in August 30, 2012 

SIP, Attachment B

Adele Malone to: Jefferson Wehling 10/03/2012 08:09 AM

Cc: Rory Mays, Anthony Roberts

Hi Jeff,

As we agreed, the NDEP assembled the official version of the statutes submitted in Attachment B to our 

August 30, 2012 revision submittal. These are from the 2011 version of the Nevada Revised Statutes. 

Please add the attached document to Nevada’s August 30, 2012 infrastructure SIP submittal as a 

supplement to Attachment B.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks, Adele

From: Jefferson Wehling [mailto:Wehling.Jefferson@epamail.epa.gov] 

Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 9:28 AM

To: Adele Malone

Cc: Rory Mays

Subject: Official Copies of Statutory Provisions Included in August 30, 2012 SIP, Attachment B

Adele:

Thanks again for your help assembling these documents. I would appreciate your review of the attached 

file, which includes the official published versions of the various statutory provisions included in

attachment B to NDEP's August 30, 2012 SIP revision submittal. If acceptable, please send a return 

email re-attaching it and indicated that you would like to add it to the August 30, 2012 SIP submittal as a 

supplement to attachment B. Please call me if you have any questions. Thanks very much. 

Jeff Wehling

U.S. EPA, Region 9, ORC-2

75 Hawthorne Street

San Francisco, CA 94105

Telephone: (415) 972-3901

Fax: (415) 947-3570Official 2011 NRS for EPA, supplement to 8-30-12 submittal.pdf
Exhibit 32.2





CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)







In connection with the Quarterly Report of Elderwatch, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Allan Weiss, Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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, as amended; and

(2)

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.



By/s/ Allan Weiss

Allan Weiss

Principal Accounting Officer



Date:  November 15, 2005
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                         SARBANES-OXLEY ACT SECTION 906
                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

            I, Klaus Moeller, Chief Executive Officer and Interim Chief
Financial Officer of Genius Products, Inc. (the "Registrant"), do hereby certify
pursuant to Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code
that:

            (1) the Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Registrant
for the period ended December 31, 2003 (the "Report"), to which this statement
is filed as an exhibit, 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
Registrant.

Dated:  August 10, 2004               By: /S/ KLAUS MOELLER
                                          --------------------------------------
                                          Klaus Moeller
                                          Chief Executive Officer and Interim
                                          Chief Financial Officer (principal
                                          financial officer)