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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM VERITAS DGC
INC.'S FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED JULY 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10K.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1996
<CASH>                                             327
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   65,447
<ALLOWANCES>                                       740
<INVENTORY>                                      1,659
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                85,704
<PP&E>                                         165,104
<DEPRECIATION>                                  86,094
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 198,592
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           63,225
<BONDS>                                         27,351
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           113
<OTHER-SE>                                     105,810
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   198,592
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               250,596
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  198,711
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,466
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,403
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,009
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,281
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,281
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .07<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .07
<FN>
<F1>AS RESTATED FOR SFAS NO. 128 "EARNINGS PER SHARE"
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D18-82

_____________________________

BRIDGET HERNDON, as Personal 

Representative of the Estate of

MICHAEL VINCENT LOWMAN,

Appellant,

v.

ADVENT CHRISTIAN VILLAGE,

INC., a Florida corporation,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Suwannee County.

David W. Fina, Judge.

November 28, 2018

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

LEWIS, RAY, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur.
2

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

D. Andrew Vloedman of Perry, Vloedman & Brady, Gainesville, for 

Appellant.

Philip F. Moring and Rafael E. Martinez of McEwan, Martinez, 

Dukes & Hall, P.A., Orlando, for Appellee.
#### Patricia KIRBY v. CITY OF MIAMI.

No. 36844.

Supreme Court of Florida.

April 1968.

Appeal dismissed without opinion.
#### Weaver BATCHELOR and Lillian Batchelor, Appellants, v. DOMESTIC FINANCE CORPORATION OF MIAMI #1, Appellee.

No. 67-781.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Nov. 14, 1967.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3477 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3477

 To prohibit defense contractors from being reimbursed by the Federal 
          Government for certain environmental response costs.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            November 9, 1993

 Mrs. Maloney introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To prohibit defense contractors from being reimbursed by the Federal 
          Government for certain environmental response costs.

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

SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON REIMBURSEMENT OF DEFENSE CONTRACTORS FOR 
              ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE COSTS.

    (a) Prohibition.--Section 2324(e)(1) of title 10, United States 
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
            ``(P) Costs of any claim for environmental response costs 
        at any facility owned or operated by the contractor or at which 
        the contractor is liable in whole or in part for the 
        environmental response action. For purposes of this 
        subparagraph, the terms `facility' and `response' have the 
        meaning given such terms by paragraphs (9) and (25), 
        respectively, of section 101 of the Comprehensive Environmental 
        Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 
        9601 (9) and (25).''.
    (b) Effective Date.--Subparagraph (P) of section 2324(e)(1) of 
title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall apply 
to contracts in existence on the date of the enactment of this Act and 
contracts entered into after such date.

                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>

                                                                  EXHIBIT 23.1

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration Statement
of Cherokee International LLC on Form S-8 of our report dated February 16,
2000, appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Cherokee International
LLC for the year ended December 31, 1999.


DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP /s/
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP


Costa Mesa, California
September 20, 2000
#### Russell RYAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-863.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Feb. 19, 1971.

Appeal dismissed.
#### Julian R. FITZGERALD v. STATE.

No. 36014.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Feb. 1968.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 203 So.2d 511.
IIA

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3499

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 21 (legislative day, JULY 20), 1994

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs

AN ACT

To amend the Defense Department Overseas Teachers Pay

and Personnel Practices Act.

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

3 SECTION 1. LEAVE FOR DODDS TEACHERS.

4 Section 6 of the Defense Department Overseas

5 Teachers Pay and Personnel Practices Act (20 U.S.C.

6 904) is amended—

7 (1) in subsection (a) by inserting ‘‘(or, if such

8 teacher is employed in a supervisory position or

9 higher, not less than ten and not more than thir10 teen)’’ after ‘‘ten’’;

11 (2) in subsection (d) by striking ‘‘of the mili12 tary department concerned’’ and inserting ‘‘of De13 fense’’; and
2

•HR 3499 RFS

1 (3) by adding at the end the following:

2 ‘‘(h) The Director of Dependents’ Education, in con3 sultation with the Director of the Office of Personnel Man4 agement—

5 ‘‘(1) shall establish for teachers a voluntary

6 leave transfer program similar to the one under sub7 chapter III of chapter 63 of title 5, United States

8 Code; and

9 ‘‘(2) may establish for teachers a voluntary

10 leave bank program similar to the one under sub11 chapter IV of chapter 63 of title 5, United States

12 Code.

13 Only leave described in the last sentence of subsection (c)

14 of this section (relating to leave that may be used by a

15 teacher for any purpose) may be transferred under any

16 program established under this subsection.’’.

Passed the House of Representatives July 19, 1994.

Attest: DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

Clerk.
103d CONGRESS

2d Session H.R. 3499

AN ACT

To amend the Defense Department Overseas

Teachers Pay and Personnel Practices Act.
Exhibit 23.2

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors

Devcon International Corp.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in
the registration statements listed below of Devcon International Corp. and subsidiaries of our report dated April 15, 2006, except as to Note 1p, which is as of April 17, 2007, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Devcon
International Corp. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2005, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders equity and comprehensive (loss) income, and cash flows for each of the years in the two-year period ended
December 31, 2005, which report appears in the December 31, 2006 annual report on Form 10-K of Devcon International Corp. and subsidiaries.



| |  | Forms S-8 (Registration No. 333-113853, No. 33-59557 and No. 333-92231)
|- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  | Forms S-3 and S-3/A (Registration No. 333-119158 and No. 33-65235)
|- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------

/s/ KPMG LLP

April 17, 2007

Fort Lauderdale, Florida

Certified Public Accountants
103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3110

AN ACT

To designate the United States courthouse and Federal

building to be constructed at the southeastern corner

of Liberty and South Virginia Streets in Reno, Nevada,

as the ‘‘Bruce R. Thompson United States Courthouse

and Federal Building’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

4 The United States courthouse and Federal building

5 to be constructed at the southeastern corner of Liberty

6 and South Virginia Streets in Reno, Nevada, is designated

7 as the ‘‘Bruce R. Thompson United States Courthouse

8 and Federal Building’’.
2

•HR 3110 EH

1 SEC. 2. LEGAL REFERENCES.

2 Any reference in any law, regulation, document,

3 record, map, or other paper of the United States to the

4 courthouse and Federal building referred to in section 1

5 is deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Bruce R. Thompson

6 United States Courthouse and Federal Building’’.

Passed the House of Representatives August 8,

1994.

Attest:

Clerk.

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3110

AN ACT

To designate the United States courthouse and

eral Building’’.Thompson United States Courthouse and FedStreets in Reno, Nevada, as the ‘‘Bruce R.eastern corner of Liberty and South VirginiaFederal building to be constructed at the south-
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 7165** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , P laintiff

- Appell ee ,

v. RAJ KUMAR BANSAL, a/k/a The Old Man , Defendant

- Appell ant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria

. Claude M. Hilton , Senior District Judge. ( 1:07

- cr - 00177

- CMH

- 1 )

Submitted : January 18, 2011 Decided: January 26, 2011

Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and AGEE , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un publish ed per curiam opinion

. Raj Kumar Bansal , Appellant Pro Se. Daniel Joseph Grooms, III , Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria , Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Appellant Raj Kumar Bansal appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to reduce his sentence based on his assistance to the government. A district court may modify a defendant’s sentence only as provided by statute. See 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006) (providing cir cumstances in which a term of imprisonment can be altered once imposed); United States v. Dunphy

AFFIRMED , 551 F.3d 247, 2 50 (4th Cir. 2009). Because this case does not involve a motion by the Director of the Bureau of Prisons or a Federal Rule of Criminal Procedu re 35 motion by the United States Attorney, we conclude that the district court correctly determined that it lacked the authority to alter the sentence imposed. Accordingly, we affirm its judgment, and dismiss Bansal’s motion for a expedited ruling on the existing pleadings as moot. 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.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED INCOME STATEMENTS, THE CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND THE
ACCOMPANYING NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          15,418
<SECURITIES>                                    93,200
<RECEIVABLES>                                   21,734
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     11,380
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               144,903
<PP&E>                                          14,792
<DEPRECIATION>                                   8,731
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 210,241
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           22,376
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            14
<OTHER-SE>                                     187,851
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   210,241
<SALES>                                         30,611
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                36,503
<CGS>                                           17,205
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   17,205
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,245
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    918
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,153
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (235)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (235)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.02)


</TABLE>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v.
DAVID CROSBY,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 17

- 30119

D.C. No. 1:16

- cr

- 00009

- SPW

- 1

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Montana Susan P. Watters, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted August 27, 2018

Seattle, Washington

Before: HAWKINS, McKEOWN, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

David Crosby appeal s his jury trial conviction for failure to register as a sex

offender, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2250. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §

1291, and affirm.

Crosby contends that the prosecutor engaged in improper witness vouching

during closing and rebuttal arguments. Because Crosby did not object to the

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3. 

# FILED

SEP 6 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 17

- 30119

prosecutor’s statemen ts during the trial, “we review under the more deferential plain

error standard.” See United States v. Ruiz , 710 F.3d 1077, 1082 (9th Cir. 2013)

(quoting United States v. Wrigh t , 625 F.3d 583, 610 (9th Cir. 2010)).

The prosecutor’s statement that the government’s witness , Stephanie Harman,

had no “ dog in the fight” and submission that it was reasonable to believe Ms.

Harman testified truthfully did not cross the line. We have previously held that

statements , analogou s to the prosecutor’s statement here, regarding a witness’

motive to lie did not amount to vouching. See United States v. Wilkes , 662 F.3d 524,

540 (9th Cir. 2011); United States v. Nash , 115 F.3d 1431, 1439 (9th Cir. 1997).

The prosecutor’s submission that it was reasonable to believe Ms. Harman

testified truthfully , viewed in context, was an argument of “ inference from evidence

in the record ” rather than vouching. United States v. Necoechea , 986 F.2d 1273,

1279 (9th Cir. 1993). A prosecutor has “considerable leeway” to argue reasonable

inferences from the evidence, United States v. Tucker , 641 F.3d 1110, 1120 (9th Cir.

2011) (citation omitted) , and the statement s here did not place “[the government’s]

own p restige behind the witness” or “indicat[e] that extrinsic information not

presented in court support[ed] the witness’ testimony,” United States v. Simtob , 901

F.2d 799, 805 (9th Cir. 1990).

Even if vouching did occur, Crosby has not “demonstrate[d] a reaso nable

probability that he would n’t have been found guilty had the error not occurred.” See3 17

- 30119

United States v. Rangel

- Guzman , 752 F.3d 1222, 1225

– 26 (9th Cir. 2014)

. The

record demonstrates that (1) the government offered sufficient evidence as ide from

Ms. Harman’s testimony; (2) the prosecutor’s statements followed the defense’s

a ttack on Ms. Harman’s testimony; and (3) the jury was properly instructed on its

duty to evaluate witness credibility and the appropriate considerations f or doing so.

AFFIRMED

.
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 3397

To direct the President to establish a commission for making

recommendations to improve the Federal emergency management system.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 28, 1993

Mr. ANDREWS of New Jersey (for himself, Mr. HOYER, and Mr. WELDON)

introduced the following bill; which was referred jointly to the Committees

on Public Works and Transportation and Armed Services

A BILL

To direct the President to establish a commission for making

recommendations to improve the Federal emergency

management system.

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 ‘‘Presidential FEMA

5 Reform Act of 1993’’.

6 SEC. 2. COMMISSION ON FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGE7 MENT REFORM.

8 (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—Not later than 90 days after

9 the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall
2

•HR 3397 IH

1 establish a commission to review the Federal emergency

2 management system for the purpose of making rec3 ommendations for improving such system.

4 (b) COMPOSITION.—The commission established

5 under this section shall be composed of such members as

6 the President shall appoint. Such members may include—

7 (1) representatives of the emergency manage8 ment community;

9 (2) representatives of State and local govern10 ments, including governments having jurisdiction

11 over areas which have recently been struck by disas12 ters and emergencies which warranted a Federal re13 sponse; and

14 (3) officials of the Federal Government who

15 have responsibilities for responding to disasters and

16 emergencies.

17 SEC. 3. REPORT.

18 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after the

19 date of its establishment under section 2, the commission

20 shall submit to the President and Congress a report which

21 makes specific recommendations for improving the Fed22 eral emergency management system.

23 (b) MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS.—The report under

24 this section shall include, at a minimum, specific rec25 ommendations for—
3

•HR 3397 IH

1 (1) administrative reform in existing agencies

2 that have responsibility for responding to disasters

3 and emergencies in the United States;

4 (2) Federal legislation necessary to implement

5 the recommendations of the commission; and

6 (3) improving State and local emergency man7 agement systems.

Æ
MT

AK

NM

OR MN

KS

SD

ND

MO

WA

FL

IL IN

WI NY

PA

MI

OH

IA

ME

MA

CT 

AZ

HI

NV

TX

TN

KY

WV

MS AL

AR OK

CA CO

WY

UT

ID

NE

GA

NC

LA

VA

SC

RI 

DE 

MD 

DC 

NJ 

Figure 4.

Divorce Rates for Women by State: 2009

(For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, 

and definitions, see www.census.gov/acs/www/)

VT NH

U.S. average: 

9.7 divorces 

per 1,000 women 

15 and older

Divorce Rates and 

Statistical Significance

6.0–8.2

8.3–9.7

9.8–11.0

11.1–16.2

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2009.

•

•

•

• •

•

•

•

•

• • •

• •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

• •

Different from U.S. average

Divorce rates

Statistical significance
Exhibit 32.1


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      In connection with the Annual Report of Trident Rowan Group, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2003, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Mark S. Hauser, Joint Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
         15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 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 Company.


Date: May 25, 2004
                                                /s/ Mark S. Hauser
                                                -----------------------
                                                Mark S. Hauser


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.