alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
109TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 2167

AN ACT

To amend the USA PATRIOT ACT to extend the sunset

of certain provisions of that Act and the lone wolf provision of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention

Act of 2004 to July 1, 2006.

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

2

S 2167 ES

1 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF SUNSET OF CERTAIN PROVI2 SIONS OF THE USA PATRIOT ACT AND THE

3 LONE WOLF PROVISION OF THE INTEL4 LIGENCE REFORM AND TERRORISM PREVEN5 TION ACT OF 2004.

6 Section 224(a) of the Uniting and Strengthening

7 America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to

8 Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT)

9 Act of 2001 (18 U.S.C. 2510 note) is amended by striking

10 ‘‘December 31, 2005’’ and inserting ‘‘July 1, 2006’’.

Passed the Senate December 21, 2005.

Attest:

Secretary.
109TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 2167

AN ACT

To amend the USA PATRIOT ACT to extend the

2006.and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 to July 1,lone wolf provision of the Intelligence Reformsunset of certain provisions of that Act and the
EXHIBIT 1

                         MANAGEMENT CERTIFICATION

I, Pamela Lindquist, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of DOLPHIN
PRODUCTIONS, 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 statement 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 periods presented in this
quarterly report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are 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. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based
on our 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 the registrant's other certifying officers and I have
indicated in this quarterly report whether 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.



                         DOLPHIN PRODUCTIONS, INC.


Date: February 1, 2006                      /s/ Pamela Lindquist


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

                                            Pamela Lindquist, Vice President
                                            and Principal Financial Officer
<PAGE>
                                                                     EXHIBIT 4.6

June 26, 2001

Mr. Frank ten Brink
Waste Systems, Inc.
28161 N. Keith Drive
Lake Forest, Illinois 60045


VIA FACSIMILE: (847) 367-9462


Dear Mr. Ten Brink:

     As the Amended and Restated Secured Promissory Note dated October 1, 1998
in the principle amount of $5,629,378.97, payable to Waste Systems, Inc. ("WSI")
will mature July 1st. 2001, we are requesting to renegotiate and extend the note
under the following terms to October 1, 2001.

Proposed Terms:

a)   Maturity. The Note will mature October 1, 2001. In the event the parties
     mutually agree on a future repayment schedule prior to October 1, 2001, WSI
     is willing to negotiate a one year term until October 1, 2002.

b)   Repayment of principal: For WSI to lower the Interest rate and to extend
     the note, 3CI will repay $400,000 in principal prior to June 28, 2001.

c)   Revolver Facility: WSI will allow 3CI to draw up to $100,000 from a new
     revolver facility, which facility will also expire October 1, 2001.

d)   Interest Rate, starting July 1, 2001. Wall Street Journal "Money Rates"
     (Southwestern Edition) Prime Rate plus 1.5% per annum not to exceed 13%.


<PAGE>
Mr. Frank ten Brink
June 26, 2001
Page 2


e)   Interest Payments. Interest payable quarterly in arrears on the first day
     of the succeeding quarter.

f)   Financial Covenant. The Amended and Restated Note will contain a minimum
     EBITDA covenant of $1,500,000 for the six months ending September 30, 2001.
     Such covenant will be measured on a trailing six months basis. If the
     minimum EBITDA goal is not obtained warrants will be issued based on a
     market price of $0.36 (market price as of June 26,2001) and in an amount
     intended to equal 5% of the principal balance for the quarter ending in
     question. The Note as amended will not contain a minimum net income
     covenant nor a minimum shareholder equity covenant currently contained in
     the Note subparagraph (h) and (I) on page 3 of the 3CI Note.

g)   Warrants If the minimum EBITDA goal is not obtained warrants will issued
     based on a market price of $0.36 (market price of June 26, 2001).

h)   Confirmation of Existing Liens. The Company will ratify and confirm all
     existing liens in favor of WSI securing the Note.

i)   Payment of WSI Fees and Expenses. The Company shall pay all of WSI's
     reasonable legal fees and expenses incurred by it in connection with the
     negotiation and documentation of the Proposed Note and related documents
     and instruments.

j)   Waiver of Existing Defaults. WSI will waive, if applicable, all existing
     events of default under the Note through January 1, 2001.

Please indicate your acceptance by signing and faxing back to me.

Yours truly,

/s/ Otley Smith
Otley Smith
CEO, 3CI

/s/ Frank J.M. ten Brink
Frank J.M. ten Brink
Vice President
Waste Systems, Inc.
i.tJ S 4 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION IX 4 ppO1 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 941O539O1 

## JAN 042013 Mr. Eric Massey Division Director Air Quality Division ArizonaDepartment ofEnvironmental Quality 1110 West Washington Street Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2953 Dear MMassey: On Dcember 27, 2012, the U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA) received arevision to the Arizona state implementation plan (SIP) from the ArizonaDepartment ofEnvironmental Quality. The 

### SIP revision was submittedto address infrastructure elements found in section 110(a)(2) ofthe Clean AirAct (CAA) which are necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce the 2008 ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) in Arizona. The EPAhas determinedthat elements are complete with the following exceptions:
• 1 10(a)(2)(C) for Maricopa, Pima, and Pinal Counties (PSD portions) • I 10(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for Maricopa, Pima, and Pinal Counties (PSD portions) • 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) For Maricopa, Pima, and Pinal Counties (PSD portions) • 11 0(a)(2)(J) for Marieopa. Pima, and Pinal Counties (PSD portions) • 110(a)(2)(K) for Maricopa, Pima. and Pinal Counties (PSD portions) Ifyou have any questions please contactme at (415) 947-8715 or Jordan.deborahepa.gov. or Doris Lo at (415) 972-3959 or Lo.dorisepa.gov. Sincerely, DeborahJordan. Director, AirDivision

Printed on Recycled Paper
### Ground water in the Cuyama Valley, California

By: J. E. UpsonGeorge Frank Worts

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/wsp1110B

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (0.98 MB pdf)                          Map of the Cuyama Valley and vicinity showing locations of observation wells, rain gages, and stream-gaging sites
  - **Plate 2**                            (2.78 MB pdf)                          Map of the Cuyama Valley, California, showing generalized geology and hydrologic features 
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

This is the fourth of a series of interpretive reports on the water resources of the major valleys of Santa Barbara County, Calif., prepared by the Geological Survey, United States Department of the Interior, in cooperation with Santa Barbara County. The first three reports described the other major valleys in the county: the south-coast basins, Goleta and Carpinteria, and the Santa Maria and Santa Ynez River valleys. This report deals with the Cuyama Valley in the northeastern part of the county and adjoining parts of San Luis Obispo, Kern, and Ventura Counties. It includes estimates of natural discharge, pumpage, and yield of ground water, and all data on water levels, well records, and water quality that were available up to June 1946.

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
<PAGE>

                                                              EXHIBIT 24.1


POWER OF ATTORNEY





KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned EDWIN HUNT hereby 
constitutes and appoints CHARLES A. ADAMS AND GLENMORE JAMES, or either of 
them, his true and lawful attorneys-in-fact and agents, each with full power 
of substitution and resubstitution for him and in his name, place and stead 
in any and all capacities, to sign the Form 10-KSB, Annual Report, of 
Portland Brewing Co., an Oregon corporation, for fiscal year ended December 
31, 1996, and any amendments thereto, and to file this Power of Attorney and 
the Form 10-KSB, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection 
therewith with the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto each of 
said attorneys-in-fact and agents full power and authority to do and perform 
each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about 
the premises, as fully to all interests and purposes as he might or could do 
in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that each of said 
attorneys-in-fact and agents, or his substitute or substitutes, may do or 
cause to be done by virtue hereof.

Dated this 25th day of February, 1997.



Signature




/S/  EDWIN HUNT,  Director
---------------
Edwin Hunt
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1944 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Cuprate(3-), [2-[[[[3-[[4- 

[[2-[2- (ethenylsulfonyl)ethoxy]ethyl]amino]-6-fluoro-1,3,5-triazin-2- 

yl]amino]-2-(hydroxy-.kappa.O)-5-sulfophenyl]azo- 

.kappa.N2]phenylmethyl]azo-.kappa.N1]-4-sulfobenzoato(5-)-.kappa.O], 

trisodium. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 1, 2005 

Mrs. LINCOLN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Cuprate(3-), [2- 

[[[[3-[[4-[[2-[2- (ethenylsulfonyl)ethoxy]ethyl]amino]-6- 

fluoro-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl]amino]-2-(hydroxy-.kappa.O)-5- 

sulfophenyl]azo-.kappa.N2]phenylmethyl]azo-.kappa.N1]- 

4-sulfobenzoato(5-)-.kappa.O], trisodium. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•S 1944 IS 

1 SECTION 1. SUSPENSION OF DUTY ON CUPRATE(3-), [2-[[[[3- 

2 [[4-[[2-[2- 

3 (ETHENYLSULFONYL)ETHOXY]ETHYL]AMINO]- 

4 6-FLUORO-1,3,5-TRIAZIN-2-YL]AMINO]-2-(HY5 DROXY-.KAPPA.O)-5-SULFOPHENYL]AZO6 .KAPPA.N2]PHENYLMETHYL]AZO-.KAPPA.N1]- 

7 4-SULFOBENZOATO(5-)-.KAPPA.O], TRISODIUM. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.02.47 of the Har9 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended 

10 by striking ‘‘12/31/2006’’ and inserting ‘‘12/31/2009’’. 

11 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

12 subsection (a) applies to articles entered, or withdrawn 

13 from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day 

14 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ
#### Ex parte William R. WATERS, Jr.

77-576.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

June 30, 1978.

JONES, Judge.

WRIT DENIED.

TORBERT, C. J., and MADDOX, SHORES and BEATTY, JJ., concur.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-6065

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

GALACIO CISNEROS-ALCANTAR,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard,

Senior District Judge. (5:05-cr-00132-H-1; 5:07-cv-00027-H)

Submitted: April 25, 2013 Decided: April 30, 2013

Before AGEE and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Galacio Cisneros-Alcantar, Appellant Pro Se. Ethan A. Ontjes, 

Stephen Aubrey West, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, 

North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Galacio Cisneros-Alcantar seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 

Supp. 2012) motion. We dismiss the appeal for lack of 

jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. 

When the United States or its officer or agency is a 

party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty 

days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or 

order, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court 

extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or 

reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he 

timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a 

jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 

214 (2007).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket 

on February 23, 2009. The notice of appeal was filed on 

December 23, 2012.∗ Because Cisneros-Alcantar failed to file a 

timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening 

of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

 ∗ For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date 

appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could 

have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to 

the court. Fed. R. App. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 

(1988).
3

adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 179 (Tuesday, September 16, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 48591]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-24467]



[[Page 48591]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board
[Order No. 918]


Expansion of Foreign-Trade Zone 21; Charleston, South Carolina 
Area

    Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of 
June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade 
Zones Board (the Board) adopts the following Order:

    Whereas, an application from the South Carolina State Ports 
Authority, grantee of Foreign-Trade Zone 21, Charleston, South 
Carolina, area, for authority to expand FTZ 21 to include four 
additional sites in the Charleston, South Carolina, area, was filed by 
the Board on March 7, 1997 (FTZ Docket 13-97, 62 FR 12793, 3/18/97);
    Whereas, notice inviting public comment was given in Federal 
Register and the application has been processed pursuant to the FTZ Act 
and the Board's regulations; and,
    Whereas, the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the 
examiner's report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and 
Board's regulations are satisfied, and that the proposal is in the 
public interest;
    Now, therefore, the Board hereby orders:
    The application to expand FTZ 21 is approved, subject to the Act 
and the Board's regulations, including Section 400.28, and subject to 
the standard 2,000-acre activation limit for the overall zone project.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 5th day of September 1997.
Jeffrey P. Bialos,
Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Import Administration, 
Alternate Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board.
[FR Doc. 97-24467 Filed 9-15-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
#### Willie Edward SIMS, Jr. a/k/a Willie Edward Simms, Jr. v. STATE of Florida.

No. 39086.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Dec. 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 225 So.2d 472.
**Exhibit 32.2**

**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 ofGSI Group Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended April 1, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert Buckley, Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge: 

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

(2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

 

May 16, 2011

This Certification shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,or otherwise subject to the liability of that section, or incorporated by reference into any of the Company’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission by implication or by any reference in any such filings to the Report. 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to GSI Group Inc. and will be retained by GSI Group Inc. andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Sandra Cochran BARLOW v. Joseph Eugene COCHRAN.

No. 49930.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Sept. 28, 1977.

C. R. McRae, Pascagoula, for appellant.

M. Glenn Barlow, Pascagoula, for appel-lee.

Before SMITH, P. J., and BROOM and LEE, JJ.

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Robin Smyth certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of ROO Group, Inc.;

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 small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The small business issuer'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)) for the small business issuer 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 small business issuer is made
known to us by others,  particularly  during the period in which this  report is
being prepared;

      (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's  disclosure
controls 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 small  business  issuer's
internal  control  over  financial  reporting  that  occurred  during  the small
business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth
fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or
is reasonably likely to materially  affect, the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and

5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
based  on  our  most  recent  evaluation  of  internal  control  over  financial
reporting,  to the small business  issuer's  auditors and the audit committee of
the small  business  issuer'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 small  business  issuer'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 small business  issuer's  internal
control over financial reporting.

August 22, 2005

/s/ Robin Smyth
-----------------------
Robin Smyth
Chief Financial Officer