alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1844 

To suspend temporarily the duty on ski poles. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 22, 2009 

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

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on ski poles. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN SKI EQUIPMENT. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Ski poles and parts and accessories thereof (provided 

for in subheading 

9506.19.8040) ....................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2011 ’’. 

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

9 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1844 IS

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

2 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit  23.1


                         Consent of Independent Auditors


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8  No.  333-16939)  pertaining  to  the  1994  Incentive  Plan of Clean Diesel
Technologies,  Inc.,  of  our  report  date  March  14, 2001 with respect to the
financial statements of Clean Diesel Technologies Inc., and the inclusion of our
report  in  this  Annual Report (Form 10K) for the year ended December 31, 2000.


/s/  ERNST  &  YOUNG  LLP

Stamford,  Connecticut
March 23, 2001


                                       38
<PAGE>
**EXHIBIT 24****POWER OF ATTORNEY**     Each director and/or officer of CheckFree Corporation (the “Corporation”) whose signatureappears below hereby appoints Peter J. Kight, David E. Mangum, and Curtis A. Loveland as theundersigned’s attorneys or any of them individually as the undersigned’s attorney, to sign, in theundersigned’s name and behalf and in any and all capacities stated below, and to cause to be filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”), the Corporation’s Annual Report onForm 10-K (the “Form 10-K”) for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2006, and likewise to sign and filewith the Commission any and all amendments to the Form 10-K, and the Corporation hereby alsoappoints such persons as its attorneys-in-fact and each of them as its attorney-in-fact with likeauthority to sign and file the Form 10-K and any amendments thereto granting to each suchattorney-in-fact full power of substitution and revocation, and hereby ratifying all that any suchattorney-in-fact or the undersigned’s substitute may do by virtue hereof.     INWITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands this 31st day of August, 2006.   *Signature* *Title*   /s/ Peter J. Kight Peter J. Kight Chairman of the Board andChief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)  /s/ David E. Mangum David E. Mangum Executive Vice President and Chief FinancialOfficer(Principal Financial Officer)   /s/ John J. Browne, Jr. John J. Browne, Jr. Vice President, Controller, andChief Accounting Officer(Principal Accounting Officer)   /s/ William P. Boardman William P. Boardman Director   /s/ James D. Dixon James D. Dixon Director   /s/ C. Kim Goodwin C. Kim Goodwin Director   /s/ Mark A. Johnson Mark A. Johnson Director   /s/ Eugene F. Quinn Eugene F. Quinn Director   /s/ Jeffrey M. Wilkins Jeffrey M. Wilkins Director
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. No. 98-4080

COLIN MASSIAS, a/k/a Jamaican C,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.

Thomas A. Wiseman, Jr., Senior District Judge,

sitting by designation.

(CR-94-148-V)

Submitted: March 16, 1999

Decided: March 30, 1999

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Terry F. Rose, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Mark T. Calloway, United States Attorney, Frank D. Whitney, Assistant United

States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).
OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Colin Massias appeals his conviction and sentence after a conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (1994). We affirm.

The Government's evidence showed that Massias was involved in

a conspiracy that bought powder cocaine and cooked it into crack

cocaine for distribution. Massias often supervised the cooking of the

cocaine into crack and also served as security for the conspiracy. The

court originally sentenced Massias to 160 months' imprisonment

based only on distribution of powder cocaine. Upon the Government's appeal, this Court vacated Massias' sentence, and remanded

for resentencing with instructions for the sentencing court to consider

the substantial evidence that Massias trafficked in crack. See United

States v. Massias, No. 96-4577 (4th Cir. May 30, 1997) (unpublished). After considering this evidence, the court resentenced Massias to 324 months' imprisonment. Massias timely appealed.

Massias contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel

in numerous ways. Because the record does not conclusively show

ineffective assistance of counsel, we decline to consider this issue on

direct appeal. See United States v. Smith, 62 F.3d 641, 650-51 (4th

Cir. 1995). Further, the evidence was more than sufficient to support

the district court's finding that a conspiracy existed, of which Massias

was a part, and that the co-conspirators' statements admitted at trial

were made in the course of and in furtherance of the conspiracy;

therefore, the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting

these statements. See Fed. R. Evid. 801(d)(2)(E); United States v.

Neal, 78 F.3d 901, 904-05 (4th Cir. 1996).

We therefore affirm Massias' conviction and sentence. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately set forth in the materials before the court and argument

would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

 2
Unassociated Document


    CERTIFICATE
      OF AMENDMENT

    OF

    CERTIFICATE
      OF INCORPORATION

    OF

    ECHELON
      ACQUISITION CORP.

    


    ECHELON
      ACQUISITION CORP., a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue
      of
      the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

    


    DOES
      HEREBY CERTIFY:

    


    FIRST:
      That at a meeting of the Board of Directors of ECHELON ACQUISITION CORP.
      resolutions were duly adopted setting forth a proposed amendment of the
      Certificate of Incorporation of said corporation, declaring said amendment
      to be
      advisable and calling a meeting of the stockholders of said corporation for
      consideration thereof. The resolution setting forth the proposed amendment
      is as
      follows:

    


    RESOLVED,
      that the Certificate of Incorporation of this corporation be amended by changing
      the Article thereof numbered "FIRST" so that, as amended said Article shall
      be
      and read as follows:

    


    FIRST:  
      The name of the corporation is Asia Biotechnology Group Inc. 

    


    SECOND: 
      That thereafter, pursuant to resolution of its Board of Directors, the
      stockholders of the said Corporation took action by executing a written consent
      in lieu of a meeting in accordance with Section 228 of the General Corporation
      Law of the State of Delaware to approve such amendment. The holders of a
      majority of the outstanding stock entitled to consent thereto have granted
      written consent with respect to such stock in favor of said
      amendment.

    


    THIRD: 
      That said amendment was duly adopted in accordance with the provisions of
      Section 242 of the General Corporation Law of the State of
      Delaware.

     

    IN
      WITNESS WHEREOF, said ECHELON ACQUISITION CORP. has caused this certificate
      to
      be signed by its Authorized Officer this 19th
      day of
      July, 2006.

    


     

    
      	
              SIGNATURES 

            	 	 	 
	/s/ Xueliang
              Qiu	 	 	 
	
              
Xueliang
              Qiu	 	 	
            
	President
              and
              CEO
Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            
            
            U.S. Air Force
                    U.S. Air Force
        Search
                    Search AF.mil:
                        Search
                Search AF.mil:
                    Search
    News
    
        Commentaries

    Features

    Photos

    Art

    Air Force TV

    Radio

    Week in Photos

    Coronavirus Disease 2019

    Air Force Art Collection





    About Us
    
        Air Force Senior Leaders    
        SECAF

    CSAF

    CMSAF

    Biographies

    Adjunct Professors

    Fact Sheets

    Commander's Call Topics    
        CCT Archive

    50 Years of the CMSAF

    The Book

    Speeches Archive    
        Former AF Top 3 Viewpoints and Speeches

    Air Force Warrior Games 2019

    Air Force Strategic Documents

    DoD Warrior Games

    Portraits in Courage    
        Portraits In Courage Vol. I

    Portraits In Courage Vol. II

    Portraits In Courage Vol. III

    Portraits In Courage Vol. IV

    Portraits In Courage Vol. V

    Portraits In Courage Vol. VI

    Portraits In Courage Vol. VII

    Portraits In Courage Vol. VIII

    Portraits In Courage Vol. IX

    Portraits In Courage Vol. X

    Chapman MoH

    The Air Force We Need

    Events 2021

    Focus on Priorities

    Empowered Airmen

    State Licensure Portability

    CSAF Leadership Library    
        CSAF Leadership Library Bookshelf

    2018 CSAF Reading List

    2017 CSAF Reading List

    2016 CSAF Reading List





    AF Sites
    
        Social Media Sites

    Site Registration





    AF Content Management





    Careers





    Contact Us  
 Home
  News
  Photos
 Air Force Photos Search
 Search
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Full Size (0.6 MB)
 Photo Gallery
 Quick Links
                            Join the Air ForceSite MapQuestionsContact UsRSSFOIAIGAF SitesAccessibilityEEOLink DisclaimerStrategic APRSuicide PreventionSAPRUSA.govNo FEAR ActOSI Tip Line
                    Connect
                    Official United States Air Force Website
                        Subscribe to USAF News and Information
          Submit
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>         5
<LEGEND>
                  This schedule contains summary financial information extracted
                  from Wasatch Pharmaceutical,  Inc. December 31, 1998 financial
                  statements  and is  qualified  in its entirety by reference to
                  such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<CIK>                                            0000853465
<NAME>                                           Wasatch Pharmaceutical, Inc.

       

<S>                                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                     DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                                        0
<SECURITIES>                                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                 0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                  0
<INVENTORY>                                                   0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                              0
<PP&E>                                                        0
<DEPRECIATION>                                                0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                         0
<BONDS>                                                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                         0
<PREFERRED>                                                   0
<COMMON>                                                      1,000
<OTHER-SE>                                                    (1,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                  0
<SALES>                                                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                              0
<CGS>                                                         0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                 0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                              0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                            0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                               0
<INCOME-TAX>                                                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                           0
<DISCONTINUED>                                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                               0
<CHANGES>                                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                                                  0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                 .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                 .00
        


</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jose Rodriguez, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Starkey, J.), imposed November 16, 1988, upon his conviction of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, the sentence being an *654indeterminate term of 5 to 10 years imprisonment and a mandatory surcharge of $100.

Ordered that the sentence is affirmed.

The defendant’s claim that the bargained-for sentence is unduly harsh and excessive is wholly without merit *(see, People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80). Moreover, his challenge to the imposition of the surcharge is premature *(see, People v West,*124 Misc 2d 622; *see also, People v Williams,*131 AD2d 525). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Sullivan, Balletta and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
The State of TexasAppellee

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

April 29, 2014

No. 04-13-00572-CR

Fernando LOPEZ,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. 12-2454-CR

Honorable William Old, Judge Presiding

ORDER

The State’s brief was originally due March 27, 2014; however, the court granted an 

extension of time until April 28, 2014 to file the brief. The State has filed a motion requesting an 

additional extension of time.

We grant the motion and we order the State to file the brief by May 27, 2014 (60 days 

after the original due date). Counsel is advised that no further extensions of time will be granted 

absent a motion that (1) demonstrates extraordinary circumstances justifying further delay, (2) 

advises the court of the efforts counsel has expended in preparing the brief, and (3) provides the 

court reasonable assurance that the brief will be completed and filed by the requested extended 

deadline. If the brief or a conforming motion is not filed by the date ordered, the court may order 

the case submitted without a State’s brief. 

_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 29th day of April, 2014.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
# Appendix B

Written Comment and Department ResponseWritten Comment: February 27, 2012; Horry Environmental Action Team (HEAT) ..........3

Department Response: March 22, 2012.................................................................................7

### Written Comment: February 27, 2012

Horry Environmental Action Team (HEAT)[This page intentionally left blank]

### Department Response: March 22, 2012
**Exhibit32.2**

**WrittenStatement of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer**

**Pursuantto Section 906**

**of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)**

The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and theChief Financial Officer of Emergency Medical Services Corporation, as generalpartner of Emergency Medical Services L.P., a Delaware limited partnership (the“Company”), each hereby certifies that, to his knowledge on the date hereof:

(a)                the Form 10-Q of theCompany for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2007, filed on the date hereofwith the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934; and

(b)               the information containedin the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.
|        |   | /s/ William A. Sanger                                                                             |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   | William A. Sanger                                                                                 |
|   |   | Chief Executive Officer                                                                           |
|   |   | Emergency Medical Services Corporation, as   general partner of Emergency Medical   Services L.P. |
|   |   | August 9, 2007                                                                               |
|   |   |                                                                                              |
|   |   | /s/ Randel G. Owen                                                                                |
|   |   | Randel G. Owen                                                                                    |
|   |   | Chief Financial Officer                                                                           |
|   |   | Emergency Medical Services Corporation, as   general partner of Emergency Medical   Services L.P. |
|   |   | August 9, 2007                                                                               |

 

----
* 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. 00-30110 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus CHESTER CHERAMIE, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 93-CR-229-ALL-J USDC No. 97-CV-1164

-------------------- August 28, 2000 Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and WIENER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Chester Cheramie, federal prisoner # 17581-034, appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for a writ of error coram nobis . Cheramie argues that at resentencing, the district court erroneously used his prior conspiracy convictions to enhance his sentence in conflict with this court’s decision on direct appeal. Cheramie is not entitled to coram nobis relief because he is still in custody. See United States v. Castro , 26 F.3d 557, 559 (5th Cir. 1994). Further, Cheramie could have raised this issueNo. 00-30110 -2- in a direct appeal after resentencing, but failed to do so. The writ of coram nobis may not be used as a substitute for appeal. See United States v. Dyer , 136 F.3d 417, 422 (5th Cir. 1998). Motion for COA DENIED as MOOT. AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATION
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Greenville Federal Financial
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)) for the registrant and have:
 a.
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure
that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;b.
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; andc.
    
    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 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: February 13, 2009
    /s/Susan J. AllreadSusan J. AllreadChief Financial Officer