alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-50861 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JOEL ELOY GOMEZ-PERALTA, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. EP-98-CR-405-All-H

- - - - - - - - - - April 15, 1999 Before JONES, SMITH, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Joel Eloy Gomez-Peralta (Gomez) appeals his conviction and sentence for importation of cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952(a) and 960(a)(1), and possession with intent to distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Gomez contends that the district court abused its discretion when it refused to submit a proposed verdict form that would allow the jury to consider a charge of importation and possession with intent to distribute marijuana, rather than cocaine. See United States v.No. 98-50861 -2- Townsend , 31 F.3d 262, 270 (5th Cir. 1994)(holding that challenges to jury instructions are reviewed for abuse of discretion); see also Solis v. Rio Grande City Indep. School , 734 F.2d 243, 249 (5th Cir. 1984)(holding that refusal to include a requested special verdict is reviewed for abuse of discretion). Although Gomez knew he was smuggling a controlled substance, he testified at trial that he did not know he was smuggling cocaine. Rather, he thought he was smuggling marijuana. This court has held that the government is not required to prove that a defendant knew the exact nature of the substance with which he was dealing; it is sufficient that he was aware that he possessed some controlled substance. United States v. Gonzalez , 700 F.2d 196, 200 (5th Cir. 1983). The district court did not abuse its discretion when refusing to submit Gomez’s requested verdict form to the jury, because knowledge of the exact controlled substance is not an element of the offense. Id. Consequently, Gomez’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED. AFFIRMED.
USGS HomeContact USGSSearch USGS
U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 772
Acquisition ParametersHome | Acronyms | Contents | Navigation | Profiles | Logs | Metadata | Software | Index
Table 1. 11BIM01 chirp data acquisition parameters.
      SampleFrequency(kHz)FrequencyRange*(kHz)      RecordLength(ms)      ShotRate(s)      ShotSpacing**(m)      NavigationSystem      NavigationReceiverAccuracy(m)NavigationFixInterval(s)      434 - 24; 4 -20 and 4 - 16      75      0.250      0.450      OmniSTAR HP DGPS      0.201
* See the operation log for lines where changes occur.**Shot spacing was highly variable and based on a survey speed of approximately 3.5 knots.
Home | Acronyms | Contents | Navigation | Profiles | Logs | Metadata | Software | Index
AccessibilityFOIAPrivacyPolicies and Notices

U.S. Department of the Interior | U.S. Geological SurveyURL: http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/772/html/table1.htmlPage Contact Information: GS Pubs Web ContactPage Last Modified: Thursday, July 18, 2013, 12:22:01 PM
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 of IA Global, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Mark E. Scott, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, to the best of my knowledge, 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 result of operations of the
Company.

                                        /s/ Mark E. Scott
                                        -----------------
                                        Mark E. Scott
                                        Chief Financial Officer
                                        November 14, 2003
Jeffrey F. Paniati, P.E.

Executive Director & CEO

Institute of Transportation Engineers
Prioritizing 

Safety =

Safety Culture 

+ 

Safe System
SAFE SYSTEM EXPLANATION

Safe Roads and Safe Speeds 

• Seeking safety through the aggressive use of

roadway design and 

operational changes.

• Fully integrating the 

needs of all users 

(pedestrians, bicyclists, 

older, younger, 

disabled, etc.) of the 

transportation system.

Dutch Cycling Embassy
Two Key Elements

Anticipating 

Human

Error

Accommodating

Human Injury 

Tolerance
What It Will Take to 

Achieve a Safe System

Traditional

______

Novel

Using what we 

know works

_______

Trying & 

evaluating

new ideas 
SAFE SYSTEM 

FRAMEWORK

Anticipating Human Error

• Separating Users in Space

• Separating Users in Time

• Increasing Attentiveness 

and Awareness

Accommodating Human 

Injury Tolerance

• Reducing Speeds

• Reducing Impact Forces
RESOURCES

Prioritizing Safety

www.ite.org | www.nsc.org

• Safety Culture 101 Webinar

• Introduction to Safe System Webinar

• Safe System Explanation, Framework, and 

Resources 

• Safe System Podcast
TEST REPORT Analysis Nr. : 294549 . Received on :

### 31.05.94 Account Nr. : Project : SAN 582 Product/Step : Prod. Nr. : Local Nr. : Reason : tel quel :YES Description : CONCENTRATED ORGANIC STREAM see.Anal.Nr. : Appearance : PASTE (HIGHLY VISCOUS) , DARK BROWN TEST-REPORT DSC


### - EXOTHEBMIC REACTION STARTING AT - SPONTANEOUS EXOTHERMIC REACTION - ENTHALPY (EXOTHERMIC) LARGER THAN - ENDOTHERMIC REACTION STARTING AT - SAMPLE TUBE ’ SEDF~X ISOPERIBOLIC 

### BOO c NO 

### 97 210:C STAINLESS STEEL PRESSURE CRUCIBLE (CLOSED UNDER ARGON)

- EXPOSURE TIME

- TF~LOERATURE EXOTHERM OBSERVED - ATMOSPHERE - FREE GAS VOLUME APPROX.

- SAMPLE TUBE APPEARANCE OF THE SABLE AFfER THE TEST 19h I00C NO ARGON, CLOSED 25 % DES GEFAESSVOLUMENS 50 ML MIDIALvfOCLAVE WITH GLASS WALLS 5q~C}L~NGED SEDEX ISOPERIBOLIC


### - EXPOSURE TIME - TF~PERATURE EXOTHERM OBSERVED - ATMOSPHERE - FREE GAS VOLUME APPROX. - SA~LE TUBE APPEARANCE OF THE SAMPLE AFTER THE TEST 24 h i00 C NO AIR, CLOSED 25 ~ DES GEFAESSVOLUMENS 50 ML MIDIAUTOCLAVE WITH GLASS WALLS UNCH~GED D COMMENT Under inert atmosphere, no exothermal reaction was detected in the rsnge of the jacket-temperature of 50 C.

### 2,94.34~ SAN 582 ST,

8.040 mg Rate: 5.0 "C/mln A.T File: 02037.00{ DSC METTLER 07-Jun-94 Ident: 24349.0 GraphWare TA72PS.5 Integration

97.3 J/g Peak 339.2"C



## o.~ w

, Integratib’n ’ Delta H 76 mJ

9.5J/g Peak 270.8"C 

## -o.o W/g ~00. 200. 300. 400.~5-JUN-94 8:58 Page 21.57 g SAN 582 S NCENTRATED ORGANIC STREAN1
2°0° ~9 h bei ~00 C

0 ZeSt [m~n]ONCENTRATED ORGANIC STREAM] 2*5" 2.0-

0.0" 

### 21 h bei 100 C

Zeit [mln)
#### Ex parte Donald R. WILLIAMS.

SC 2726.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

Aug. 19, 1977.

JONES, Justice.

WRIT DENIED.

TORBERT, C. J., and BLOODWORTH, ALMON and EMBRY, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>
 
                               EXHIBIT 10.08(b)

<PAGE>
 
                                    FORM OF
                                   AMENDMENT
                                     TO THE
                               CUSTOMER AGREEMENT

     This Customer Agreement Amendment ("Amendment") is made as of this 1st day
of [MONTH, YEAR] by and between [THE FUND] (the "Fund") and Merrill Lynch
Futures Inc.

                              W I T N E S S E T H:

     WHEREAS, the parties hereto entered into a Customer Agreement relating to
the purchase and sale of commodity futures and forward contracts and commodity
options (the "Customer Agreement");

     WHEREAS, the parties hereto have agreed to reduce the brokerage commissions
paid by the Fund to Merrill Lynch Futures Inc., the Fund's commodity broker,
pursuant to the Customer Agreement and wish to amend the Customer Agreement
accordingly;

     NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and mutual covenants
contained in the Customer Agreement and herein, the receipt and sufficiency of
which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree to amend the Customer
Agreement as follows:

     1.  Brokerage Commissions. Beginning [DATE, YEAR] the brokerage commissions
         ---------------------                                                  
payable by the Fund to Merrill Lynch Futures Inc. will be reduced to ______ of
1% of month-end Net Assets, before reduction for such monthly brokerage
commissions and any New Profits Account allocation but after the crediting of
interest income received during the month (a ____% annual rate). Such brokerage
commissions shall not include any administrative fee paid directly to Merrill
Lynch Investment Partners Inc.

     2.  Amendment.  This Amendment may not be amended except by the written
         ---------                                                          
consent of each of the parties hereto.
 
     3.  Counterparts.  This Amendment may be executed in one or more
         ------------                                                
counterparts, each of which shall, however, together constitute one and the same
documents.

                                      -1-
<PAGE>
 
          IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment has been executed by the parties
hereto as of the day and year first above written.

 
                              [THE FUND]

                              BY:   MERRILL LYNCH INVESTMENT
                                    PARTNERS INC., General Partner


                              BY:   ________________________________
                                    Name:
                                    Title:
 


                              MERRILL LYNCH FUTURES INC.
 

                              BY:   ________________________________
                                    Name:
                                    Title:

                                      -2-
#### Kenneth R. DOUGLAS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-1273.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 9, 1971.

Kenneth R. Douglas, in pro. per.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and CHARLES CARROLL and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This court, proceeding in the manner outlined and recommended by the Supreme Court of the United States in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, having deferred ruling on a motion of the public defender to withdraw as counsel for the indigent defendant-appellant, and having furnished appellant with a copy of the public defender’s memorandum brief, and having allowed the appellant a reasonable specified time within which to raise any points that he chose in support of his appeal, and the appellant having failed to respond thereto, on consideration thereof upon full examination of the proceedings we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous. Whereupon, the public defender’s said motion to withdraw is granted, and the judgment appealed is hereby affirmed.
#### Reinaldo ALONZO et ux., Appellants, v. W. L. THORNTON et al., Appellees.

No. 76-2121.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 27, 1977.

Kaplan, Dorsey, Sicking & Hessen and Joseph C. Segor, Miami, for appellants.

*650Knight, Peters, Hoeveler, Pickle, Nie-moeller & Flynn and Stephen A. Stieglitz, Miami, for appellees.

Before BARKDULL, HUBBART and KEHOE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See *West v. Jessop,*339 So.2d 1136, 1137 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976).
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 190 (Wednesday, October 1, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 51499]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-26027]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION


Interest Rates

    The Small Business Administration publishes an interest rate called 
the optional ``peg'' rate (13 CFR 120.214) on a quarterly basis. This 
rate is a weighted average cost of money to the government for 
maturities similar to the average SBA direct loan. This rate may be 
used as a base rate for guaranteed fluctuating interest rate SBA loans. 
This rate will be 6\3/8\ percent for the October-December quarter of FY 
98.
    Pursuant to 13 CFR 120.932, the maximum legal interest rate for a 
commercial loan which funds any portion of the cost of a project (see 
13 CFR 120.801) shall be the greater of 6% over the New York prime rate 
of the limitation established by the constitution or laws of a given 
State. The initial rate for a fixed rate loan shall be the legal rate 
for the term of the loan.
LeAnn Oliver,
Acting Associate Administrator for Financial Assistance.
[FR Doc. 97-26027 Filed 9-30-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-M
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

BENJAMIN RICHARD GEER, JR., )

Petitioner, )

) C.A. No. 06-38 Erie

vs. ) District Judge McLaughlin 

) Magistrate Judge Baxter 

SUPERINTENDENT JOSEPH NISH, )

Respondent. )

MEMORANDUM ORDER

During a telephonic hearing on Petitioner’s motion to subpoena documents [Document 

# 14] held before Magistrate Judge Baxter on August 25, 2006, Petitioner acknowledged that he

had not exhausted his state court remedies regarding the claims set forth in his pending habeas

petition. Magistrate Judge Baxter recommended on the record that this case be closed

administratively, without prejudice, to allow Petitioner to fully exhaust his state court remedies. 

AND NOW, this 13th day of September, 2006;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the foregoing recommendation by Magistrate Judge

Baxter be adopted as the opinion of this Court, and that this case be closed administratively,

without prejudice to Petitioner’s right to re-open this case in the event he is successful in fully

exhausting his state court remedies.

s/ Sean J. McLaughlin

United States District Judge

cc: The Honorable Susan Paradise Baxter 

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 1:06-cv-00038-SJM-SPB Document 20 Filed 09/13/06 Page 1 of 1
#### Morris LEFKOWITZ, Appellant, v. CITY OF MIAMI, a Municipal Corporation, Appellee.

No. 76-1449.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Nov. 8, 1977.

Tew & Mason, Miami, for appellant.

George F. Knox, Jr., City Atty., and Eugene M. Steinfeld, Asst. City Atty., for ap-pellee.

Before HENDRY, C. J., and HUBBART and KEHOE, JJ.

*749PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *Ammerman v. Florida Board of Pharmacy,*174 So.2d 425 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965); *Morris v. City of Hialeah,*140 So.2d 615 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962).
```

[104th Congress Public Law 151]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

<DOC>
[DOCID: f:publ151.104]

[[Page 110 STAT. 1383]]

Public Law 104-151
104th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the United States courthouse <<NOTE: July 1, 1996 -  [H.R. 
   3029]>>  in Washington, District of Columbia, as the ``E. Barrett 
                  Prettyman United States Courthouse''.

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

SECTION 1. <<NOTE: 40 USC 129a note.>> DESIGNATION OF COURTHOUSE.

    The United States courthouse located at 3rd Street and Constitution 
Avenue, Northwest, in Washington, District of Columbia, shall be 
designated and known as the ``E. Barrett Prettyman United States 
Courthouse''.

SEC. 2. <<NOTE: 40 USC 129a note.>> REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the United States courthouse referred to 
in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``E. Barrett 
Prettyman United States Courthouse''.

    Approved July 1, 1996.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 3029 (S. 1510):
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 104-588 (Comm. on Transportation and Infrastructure).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 142 (1996):
            Feb. 7, S. 1510 considered and passed Senate.
            June 10, H.R. 3029 considered and passed House.
            June 18, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title: Motorvehicle use map. Inyo National Forest. Big Pine & Inyo Mountains,California**
 
2010:Front | Back
2013:Front | Back
2015:Front | Back
 
SuDoc Number:A 13.28: IN 8/4/BIG/
Item Number:0080-G (online)
CGP systemNumber:000911604
 
June 26, 2018
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CONTAINED IN THE BODY OF THE ACCOMPANYING FORM 10-K AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000904900
<NAME> BERG ELECTRONICS CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          11,994
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  121,988
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,657
<INVENTORY>                                     96,022
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               243,237
<PP&E>                                         450,290
<DEPRECIATION>                                 164,523
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 704,696
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          200,532
<BONDS>                                        316,544
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     135,884
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   704,646
<SALES>                                        785,150
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               785,150
<CGS>                                          505,706
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  505,706
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,185
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   898
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              28,774
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 62,310
<INCOME-TAX>                                    24,120
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             38,190
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  5,964
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    32,226
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.79
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.78
        

</TABLE>
Brussels, July 2010

The International Air Carrier Association (IACA) re presents 33 airlines serving the leisure industry. IACA members operate over 800 state-of-th e-art, environmentally efficient aircraft and directly employ more than 50,000 people. Each y ear IACA airlines transport over 100 million passengers to 650 holiday destinations worl dwide.

On behalf of its Members, IACA wishes to contribute to the public consultation organized by the US Department of Transportation (DOT), which is sued on June 8, 2010 a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, “Enhancing Airline Passenger P rotections,” (NPRM).

As some IACA’s airline members transport holiday-ma kers into the United States, the proposed rules will impact their operations.

IACA members, as European carriers, are today alrea dy subject to stringent EU passenger rights regulations. The new rules proposed by the U S DOT on certain matters will create a new (and often unnecessary) burden on airlines that operate on routes to/from the US. In a few cases, the rules proposed by the US DOT conflic t with EU law, thereby creating a risk for confusion and legal uncertainty, both for passenger s and airlines.

IACA considers that its airline members should be g iven an opportunity to analyse adequately the potential consequences of the US DOT ’s NPRM.

IACA regrets that the US DOT has proposed a sixty d ays’ period to collect input. We

consider that this does not offer sufficient time t o collect the necessary data and information from all affected parties to evaluate this Proposal . For these reasons, IACA would be grateful if the US DOT could grant an additional 90 days to collect the aforementioned essential information to provide valuable comments on the NPR M. 

### S UBJECT 

### : Request by the International Air Carrier Associatio n (IACA) for a 90-day

extension of the comment period

Docket No.: DOT-OST-2010-0140.Thank you in advance for your consideration of this request.

Yours sincerely,

Koen Vermeir Director Aeropolitical & Industry Affairs

The International Air Carrier Association - IACA Tel.: +32 (0)2 546 1066

Email: koen.vermeir@iaca.be

IACA airline members:
EXHIBIT 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the
Registration Statements on Form S-3 (File Nos. 33-82982, 33-97024, 333-25769, 333-49497, 333-51657, 333-59245, 333-94187, 333-50874, 333-108109, 333-111464, 333-127708, 333-129166, 333-135054, 333-142564, 333-142566) and Form S-8 (File Nos.
333-29059, 333-29975, 333-34119, 333-56749, 333-56747, 333-80623, 333-38490, 333-38494, 333-91468, 333-91470, 333-106066, 333-117923, 333-38484) of GTC Biotherapeutics, Inc. of our report dated March 6, 2008 relating to the financial statements and
the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We also consent to the reference to us under the heading Selected Financial Data in this Form 10-K.



|                              
|------------------------------
|/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
|Boston, Massachusetts         
|March 6, 2008