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

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 647

To amend section 6 of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources

Planning Act of 1974 to require phasing-in of certain amendments of

or revisions to land and resource management plans, and for other

purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 30 (legislative day, MARCH 27), 1995

Mr. LOTT (for himself, Mr. BURNS, Mr. COCHRAN, Mr. CRAIG, Mr.

FAIRCLOTH, Mr. HATCH, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. KYL, Mr. MACK, Mr. MURKOWSKI, and Mr. SHELBY) introduced the following bill; which was read

twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and

Forestry

A BILL

To amend section 6 of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable

Resources Planning Act of 1974 to require phasing-in

of certain amendments of or revisions to land and resource management plans, and for other purposes.

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

•S 647 IS

1 SECTION 1. PHASING-IN OF AMENDMENTS OF AND REVI2 SIONS TO LAND AND RESOURCE MANAGE3 MENT PLANS.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 6 of the Forest and

5 Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974

6 (16 U.S.C. 1604) is amended by adding at the end the

7 following:

8 ‘‘(n) PHASING-IN OF CHANGES TO LAND AND RE9 SOURCE MANAGEMENT PLANS.—

10 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—When the Secretary

11 amends or revises a land or resource management

12 plan with the purpose of increasing the population

13 of a species in a unit of the National Forest System

14 or in any area within a unit, the Secretary shall, to

15 the greatest extent practicable and except when

16 there is an imminent risk to public health, phase in

17 the amendment or revision over an appropriate pe18 riod of time determined on the basis of the consider19 ations described in paragraph (2).

20 ‘‘(2) CONSIDERATIONS.—The considerations re21 ferred to in paragraph (1) are—

22 ‘‘(A) the social and economic consequences

23 to local communities of any new policy con24 tained in an amendment or revision;
3

•S 647 IS

1 ‘‘(B) the length of time needed to achieve

2 the population increase that is the objective of

3 the amendment or revision;

4 ‘‘(C) the cost of implementation of the

5 amendment or revision; and

6 ‘‘(D) the financial resources available for

7 implementation of the amendment or revision.’’.

8 (b) APPLICATION OF AMENDMENT.—The amendment

9 made by subsection (a) shall apply to any amendment of

10 or revision to a land or resource management plan de11 scribed in the amendment that is proposed on or after the

12 date of enactment of this Act or that has been proposed

13 but not finally adopted prior to the date of enactment.

Æ
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-50180

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOSE LUIS DELARA-VELASCO,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. EP-98-CR-375-1-DB

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

August 23, 2001

Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jose Luis Delara-Velasco argues that the indictment charging

him with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute

marijuana was fatally defective because it did not allege a

specific drug quantity that was involved in the offense. He also

argues that the maximum statutory penalty that could be imposed

was a term of imprisonment of one year under 21 U.S.C. 

§ 841(b)(4) because his offense involved a small amount of

marijuana. 
No. 01-50180

-2-

Delara stipulated in the plea agreement and swore under oath

at his rearraignment hearing that his offense involved 32.2

kilograms of marijuana. Because the stipulated amount of

marijuana involved in the offense was not a small amount, Delara

was not entitled to be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of one

year under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(4). See United States v. SalazarFlores, 238 F.3d 672, 673 (5th Cir. 2001).

"[A] fact used in sentencing that does not increase a

penalty beyond the statutory maximum need not be alleged in the

indictment and proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt." 

United States v. Keith, 230 F.3d 784, 787 (5th Cir. 2000), cert.

denied, 121 S. Ct. 1163 (2001). The statutory maximum penalty

for drug offenses involving less than 50 kilograms of marijuana

is five years pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(D). See United

States v. Garcia, 242 F.3d 593, 599 (5th Cir. 2001). Delara’s

sentence of 30 months imprisonment was below the five-year

statutory maximum. Because it was unnecessary to charge a

quantity of drugs in Delara’s indictment, his indictment was

sufficient.

Insofar as Delara is challenging his sentence, the record

reflects that he entered a knowing and voluntary waiver of his

right to appeal his sentence in his plea agreement. See United

States v. Robinson, 187 F.3d 516, 517-18 (5th Cir. 1999). Thus,

review of any sentencing issues is precluded. 

Delara’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Curis, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended
September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Daniel R. Passeri, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, 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 results of operations of the Company.

Dated: October 28, 2008



/s/ DANIEL R. PASSERIDaniel R. PasseriPresident and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          50,297
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           7,117
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                10,200
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    576,108
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         193,007
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           193,396
<LOANS>                                        828,761
<ALLOWANCE>                                     22,724
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,733,618
<DEPOSITS>                                   1,267,298
<SHORT-TERM>                                   297,420
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             40,936
<LONG-TERM>                                      2,492
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            71
<OTHER-SE>                                     125,401
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               1,733,618
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 68,186
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               49,955
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                 1,073
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               119,214
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              41,720
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              59,125
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           60,089
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    1,895
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                               (126)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 55,223
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 18,813
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      11,418
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    11,418
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.74
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.65
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.57
<LOANS-NON>                                      5,352
<LOANS-PAST>                                       431
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                 1,124
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                 24,082
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                19,549
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    2,212
<RECOVERIES>                                     3,492
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               22,742
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            22,742
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
State of New York

Supreme Court, Appellate Division

Third Judicial Department

Decided and Entered: December 11, 2014 518609 

________________________________

In the Matter of the Claim of 

LAURA Q. SULLIVAN,

Respondent.

BROOKVILLE CENTER FOR MEMORANDUM AND ORDER 

 CHILDREN'S SERVICES, INC.,

Appellant.

COMMISSIONER OF LABOR,

Respondent.

________________________________

Calendar Date: October 21, 2014

Before: Lahtinen, J.P., McCarthy, Rose, Lynch and Clark, JJ.

__________

Cooper Sapir & Cohen, PC, Melville (David M. Cohen of

counsel), for appellant.

Michelle I. Rosien, Philmont, for Laura Q. Sullivan,

respondent.

__________

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal

Board, filed January 3, 2014, which ruled that claimant was

entitled to receive unemployment insurance benefits.

Claimant worked for almost seven years as a senior speech

language pathologist for the employer until she was terminated in

May 2013. The termination resulted from her running afoul of the

employer's written policy prohibiting employees from posting on

social media "during work hours, unless for specific and approved

business purposes." The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board

thereafter determined that claimant was entitled to receive

unemployment insurance benefits because, in its view, she had not
-2- 518609 

lost her job due to disqualifying misconduct. The employer now

appeals.

The question of whether a claimant engaged in actions

sufficient to disqualify him or her from receiving unemployment

insurance benefits is a factual one for the Board to resolve,

"and its determination will not be disturbed if supported by

substantial evidence" (Matter of Jaiyesimi [ISS Action Inc.–

Commissioner of Labor], 114 AD3d 983, 983 [2014]; see Matter of

Morris [Lenox Hill Neighborhood House Inc.–Commissioner of

Labor], 110 AD3d 1333, 1334 [2013]). Not every discharge for

cause rises to the level of misconduct, which is defined as "a

willful and wanton disregard of the employer's interest" (Matter

of Rahaman [New York Convention Ctr. Operating Corp.–Commissioner

of Labor], 101 AD3d 1206, 1207 [2012] [internal quotation marks

and citations omitted]). Claimant did not dispute that she was

aware of the employer's policy on social media usage and that she

nevertheless posted an item during work hours. The record also

reflects, however, that it was an isolated incident and that

claimant had a clean disciplinary record prior to her

termination. Substantial evidence thus supports the

determination of the Board that claimant's behavior, while

reflective of a momentary lapse in judgment, did not rise to the

level of disqualifying misconduct (see Matter of Nangreave

[United Health Servs. Hosps., Inc.–Commissioner of Labor], 107

AD3d 1211, 1212 [2013]; Matter of McKoy [LB&B Assoc.,

Inc.–Commissioner of Labor], 27 AD3d 922, 923 [2006]).

Lahtinen, J.P., McCarthy, Rose, Lynch and Clark, JJ.,

concur.
-3- 518609 

ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger

Clerk of the Court
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21
- 6397
ROBERT LOUIS GARRETT, JR., a/k/a Chubby, a/k/a Chubb, a/k/a Tru, a/k/a Kweli, a/k/a Justice , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. NP AMY ENLOE; NURSE LINDSEY HARRIS; NURSE KATHERINE W. BURGESS; UNKNOWN SCDC MEDICAL ADMINISTRATOR AT SCDC HEADQUARTERS; LLD B. JACOBS , Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Rock Hill

. Cameron McGowan Currie , Seni or District Judge. ( 0:19

- cv - 01953

- CMC )

Submitted : September 8, 2022 Decided: September 12, 2022

Before HARRIS and RICHARDSON , Circuit Judges , and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge

.
Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Robert Louis Garrett, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. David Allan DeMasters, DAVIDSON, WREN & DEMASTERS, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 21-6397 Doc: 36 Filed: 09/12/2022 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: Robert Louis Garrett, Jr., a South Carolina prisoner , seeks to appeal the district
court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing without prejudice Garrett’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action for failure to prosecute. The district court referred this case to a magistra te judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). The magistrate judge recommended dismissal for failure to prosecute because Garrett had not responded to Defendants’ summary judgment motion

— despite being granted two extensions for doing so

— and advised Garre tt that failure to file timely , specific objections to th e recommendation w ould waive appellate review of a district court order based on the recommendation. Garrett filed no objections.
T he timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate judge’s r ecommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned of the consequences of noncompliance. Martin v

. Duffy , 858 F.3d 239, 245 (4th Cir. 2017); Wright v. Collins , 766 F.2d 841, 84 6

- 47 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140 , 154

- 55 (1985). Garrett has waived appellate review by failing to file objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we affirm.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED USCA4 Appeal: 21-6397 Doc: 36 Filed: 09/12/2022 Pg: 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 31.1
------------

                           CERTIFICATION OF PRESIDENT
                         AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Dr. David F. Hostelley, certify that:

1.    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Entertainment Is
Us, Inc.;

2.    Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;

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

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

         a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
            material information relating to the registrant, including its
            consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
            those entities, particularly during the period in which this
            quarterly report is being prepared;

         b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
            and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date
            of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

         c) presented in this quarterly report my conclusions about the
            effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
            evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5.    I have disclosed, based on 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


<PAGE>


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


Date: May 19, 2005

/s/ Dr. David F. Hostelley
----------------------------------
Name:  Dr. David F. Hostelley
Title: President and Principal Financial Officer
List of Documents Submitted by the State of West Virginia

 Letter from Randy Huffman, Cabinet Secretary, West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection to Mr. Shawn M . Garv in, Regional Administrator, U . S. EPA, Region III (3RAOO), Philadelphia , PA 19103 - 2029  Final West Virginia State Implementation Plan Revision for Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(A) - (M) Requirements for the 2008 8 - Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards
<PAGE>

                                                                     EXHIBIT 23

                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

   As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation
of our report dated February 28, 2001 included in Mandalay Resort Group's
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended January 31, 2001 into Mandalay's
previously filed Form S-8 Registration Statements File Nos. 2-91950, 2-93578,
33-18278, 33-29014, 33-39215, 33-56420, 33-53303, 333-51073, 333-93803, 333-
93805 and 333-47268 and to Mandalay's previously filed Form S-3 Registration
Statement File No. 333-60975.

Arthur Andersen LLP

Las Vegas, Nevada
April 27, 2001
Exhibit 32.1


                                  CERTIFICATION

                    Certification of Chief Executive Officer
           Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
                             18 U.S.C. Section 1350

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Auto-Q International, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Tom
Lam, President and 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 2 condition and results of operations
          of the Company at the dates and for the periods presented in this
          Report.

 Date: August 16, 2004


/s/  Tpm Lam
----------------------------------
     Tom Lam, President and
     Chief Executive Officer
II

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 478

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow the taxable sale

or use, without penalty, of dyed diesel fuel with respect to recreational

boaters.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 27 (legislative day, FEBRUARY 22), 1995

Mr. BREAUX (for himself and Mr. CHAFEE) introduced the following bill;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow the

taxable sale or use, without penalty, of dyed diesel fuel

with respect to recreational boaters.

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

3 SECTION 1. PENALTY-FREE TAXABLE SALE OR USE OF

4 DYED DIESEL FUEL WITH RESPECT TO REC5 REATIONAL BOATERS.

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 6714 of the Internal Rev7 enue Code of 1986 (relating to dyed fuel sold for use or

8 used in taxable use, etc.), as added by section 13242(b)(1)

9 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, is
2

S 478 IS

1 amended by redesignating subsections (c) and (d) as sub2 sections (d) and (e), respectively, and by inserting after

3 subsection (b) the following new subsection:

4 ‘‘(c) EXCEPTION.—No penalty shall be imposed

5 under subsection (a) on any person who—

6 ‘‘(1) sells or holds for sale dyed fuel for use in,

7 or uses dyed fuel in, any diesel-powered boat, and

8 ‘‘(2) pays the tax imposed on such sale or use

9 under section 4041(a)(1)(A).’’.

10 (b) TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS.—

11 (1) Part II of subchapter B of chapter 68 of

12 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by

13 redesignating section 6714 (relating to dyed fuel

14 sold for use or used in taxable use, etc.), as added

15 by section 13242(b)(1) of the Omnibus Budget Rec16 onciliation Act of 1993, as section 6715.

17 (2) The table of sections for such part is

18 amended by redesignating the item relating to sec19 tion 6714 (relating to dyed fuel sold for use or used

20 in taxable use, etc.), as added by section

21 13242(b)(2) of such Act, as section 6715.

22 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

23 this section shall take effect as if included in the amend-
3

S 478 IS

1 ments made by section 13242(b) of the Omnibus Budget

2 Reconciliation Act of 1993.

Æ
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03

- 21

- 00222

- CV

Aniol III, Ltd. d/b/a River Gardens , Appellant

v.

D. B. and C. P., Individually and as Next Friends of D. P.,

an Incapacitated Adult , Appellee s

FROM THE 433RD DISTRICT COURT OF C O MAL COUNTY NO. C2020

- 1536D , THE HONORABLE STEPHANIE BASCON , JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant Aniol III, Ltd. d/b/a River Gardens has filed an unopposed moti on to

dismiss this appeal . In its motion, appellant inform s the C ourt that t he pa rties have agreed to

move that the appeal be dismissed with prejudice, that c ost s should be paid by the party incurring

the same, and that mandate be issued early to effectuate the dismissal of the appeal. We g rant

appellant’s motion a nd d ismi s s the appeal. See T e x. R. App. P. 42.1(a) ( 1)

.

__________________________________________ Chari L. Kelly

, Justice

Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Kelly and Smith

Dismissed on Appellant’s Motion

Filed: March 23, 2022