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

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 195 Referral Instructions Senate (RIS)]

  1st Session
                                 S. 195

 To amend section 257(e) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
Control Act of 1985 to modify the treatment of losses from asset sales.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

             January 11 (legislative day, January 10), 1995

 Mr. Murkowski introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
   referred jointly pursuant to the order of August 4, 1977, to the 
 Committees on the Budget and Governmental Affairs, with instructions 
that if one committee reports, the other committee have thirty days to 
                        report or be discharged

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend section 257(e) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
Control Act of 1985 to modify the treatment of losses from asset sales.

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

SECTION 1. OFFSETTING LOSSES FROM ASSET SALES.

    Section 257(e) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control 
Act of 1985 is amended by striking the semicolon at the end thereof and 
inserting the following: ``. Effective beginning fiscal year 1996, the 
proceeds from the sale of an asset may be applied to offset the loss of 
any revenue or receipts resulting from such sale.''.
                                 <all>
```
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

EG/Research

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MARIO RENE RUBIO,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

 v.

C. M. HARRISON, Warden,

 Respondent - Appellee.

No. 07-55110

D.C. No. CV-04-03710-MLR

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Manuel L. Real, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 11, 2010** 

Before: BEEZER, TROTT, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Mario Rene Rubio appeals pro se from the district

court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have

jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.

FILED

JAN 26 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
EG/Research 2 07-55110

Rubio contends that his prison disciplinary proceedings violated his due

process rights because there was insufficient evidence to support the hearing

officer’s finding that Rubio engaged in mutual combat. This contention fails

because “some evidence” in the record supports the finding. See Superintendent v.

Hill, 472 U.S. 445, 455 (1985). 

AFFIRMED.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7928 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus YOLANDA VIOLA BURGESS, Defendant - Appellant. No. 01-7991 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus YOLANDA VIOLA BURGESS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (CR-00-162-A) Submitted: February 21, 2002 Decided: March 6, 20022 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Yolanda Viola Burgess, Appellant Pro Se. Kimberly Riley Pedersen, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: In these consolidated appeals, Yolanda Viola Burgess seeks toappeal the district court’s orders denying her motions for provision of transcripts. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, wegrant leave to proceed in forma pauperis but affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Burgess , No. CR00-162-A (E.D. Va. Oct. 17, 2001; Nov. 6, 2001). 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.

AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1999
<CASH>                                          81,389
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   26,136
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     24,270
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               161,278
<PP&E>                                       3,734,789
<DEPRECIATION>                                 733,967
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,869,707
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          231,573
<BONDS>                                      2,259,149
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,894
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,155,734
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,869,707
<SALES>                                      1,479,780
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,479,780
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,204,537
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                32,464
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             101,964
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                140,815
<INCOME-TAX>                                    55,617
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             85,198
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    85,198
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .90
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .90
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



The Board of Directors
MHM Services, Inc.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No. 
333-09147) on Form S-8 of MHM Services, Inc. of our report dated December 31, 
1998, on the consolidated balance sheets of MHM Services, Inc. and subsidiaries 
as of September 30, 1998 and 1997, and the related consolidated statements of 
operations, stockholders' deficit, and cash flows for the years then ended, and 
the related schedule, which report appears in the September 30, 1998 annual 
report on Form 10-K of MHM Services, Inc.

Our report dated December 31, 1998, contains an explanatory paragraph that 
states that the Company has suffered recurring losses from operations, has a 
working capital deficiency, is experiencing difficulty in generating sufficient 
cash flows to meet its obligations and sustain its operations.  Such conditions 
raise substantial doubt as to the Company's ability to continue as a going 
concern.  The consolidated financial statements and financial statement
schedule do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of
that uncertainty.


KPMG LLP

McLean, Virginia
January 14, 1999
<PAGE>   2





                                                                Exhibit No. 23

                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
333-09147 of MHM Services, Inc. on Form S-8 of our report dated December 30,
1996, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of MHM Services, Inc. for
the year ended September 30, 1998.



/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
Washington, D.C.
January 6, 1999
1

The Honorable Dean Whipple, United States District Judge for the Western

District of Missouri.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 07-2408

___________

United States of America, *

*

Plaintiff - Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Western

* District of Missouri.

Glenn H. Harlow, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Defendant - Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: September 22, 2009

Filed: September 25, 2009

___________

Before BYE, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Glenn H. Harlow pleaded guilty to possessing a semi-automatic handgun and

ammunition, having previously been convicted of three violent felonies, in violation

of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(e)(1), (e)(2)(B). Additionally, Harlow pleaded

guilty to failing to appear at a March 13, 2006 sentencing hearing, in violation of 18

U.S.C. § 3146. At sentencing, Harlow admitted one of his predicate felonies under

the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) 18 U.S.C. § 924(e), was possession of a

short-barreled rifle in violation of Mo. Rev. Stat. § 571.020.1(5). The district court1
-2-

applied ACCA and imposed a 188-month sentence. On appeal, Harlow argues the

district court erred in concluding his conviction for possession of a short-barreled rifle

was a violent felony. We affirm.

As a preliminary matter, Harlow's objection at sentencing to the application of

ACCA was based on an amendment to Application Note 3 of U.S. Sentencing

Guidelines § 4B1.1, and not the district court's conclusion his conviction for

possession of a short-barreled rifle was a violent felony. Accordingly, we review

Harlow's arguments on appeal for plain error. See United States v. Pirani, 406 F.3d

543, 549 (8th Cir. 2005) (en banc).

Our court recently held possession of a sawed-off shotgun qualifies as a violent

felony under ACCA. United States v. Vincent, No. 07-1397, 2009 WL 2476670, at

*6 (8th. Cir. Aug. 14, 2009). Accordingly, the district court did not err in concluding

possession of a short-barreled rifle is an ACCA-qualifying felony. The judgment of

the district court is affirmed.

______________________________
**Exhibit 32.01**

 

**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 Caldera Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the year ended June 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, James W. Scott, 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, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

 

|   | (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/ James W. Scott

James W. Scott

Chief Executive Officer

January 23, 2008

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement 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.
Exhibit 32.2
                                  ------------




               Commodore Applied Technologies, Inc. & Subsidiaries
                    Certification Of Chief Financial Officer
           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 Commodore  Applied  Technologies,  Inc.
(the  "Company")  on form  10-K for the year  ended  December  31,  2004,  James
DeAngelis  hereby  certifies,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section  1350,  as adopted
pursuant to section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, that to the best of
his knowledge:

         (1)  The annual 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 annual report fairly presents, in
              all  material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and result of
              operations of the Company.



Date:    April 15, 2005


/s/ James M. DeAngelis
----------------------
James M. DeAngelis
Sr. Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           6,047
<SECURITIES>                                    24,469
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,293
<ALLOWANCES>                                        50
<INVENTORY>                                      1,109
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                36,669
<PP&E>                                           1,529
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  48,240
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,094
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            12
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    48,240
<SALES>                                          7,559
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 7,559
<CGS>                                            4,991
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,991
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                23,358
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (36)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (17,971)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (17,971)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.49)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.49)


</TABLE>
#### EAST KENTUCKY RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE CORPORATION, Appellant, v. Forest ERWIN et al., Appellee.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Feb. 21, 1958.

Ralph Mitchell, Shelbyville, for appellant.

James F. Thomas, New Castle, for appel-lee.

PER CURIAM.

Motion for appeal by East Kentucky Rural Electric Cooperative Corporation from a judgment of the Henry Circuit Court, awarding Forest Erwin and others the sum of $1,500 for an easement which appellant obtained by the exercise of its right of eminent domain. The easement is 100 feet wide and 2,359 feet in length.

Appellant contends that the award is excessive and relies upon Salt River Rural Electric Cooperative Corporation v. Thurman, Ky., 275 S.W.2d 780, to support its position.

In Tennessee Gas Transmission Company v. Teater, Ky., 252 S.W.2d 674, it was pointed out that there is no definite yardstick which a court may apply in deciding whether damages are excessive in a given case.

Since the Thurman case, we have affirmed (always by a divided court) awards *555comparable to the one in the instant case. The cases are: East Kentucky Rural Electric Cooperative Corporation v. Hall, Ky., 301 S.W.2d 891, May 3, 1957; East Kentucky Rural Electric Cooperative Corporation v. Burke., Ky., 301 S.W.2d 892, May 3, 1957; East Kentucky Rural Electric Cooperative Corporation v. Asbury, Ky., 302 S.W.2d 370, May 17, 1957; East Kentucky Rural Electric Cooperative Corporation v. Wireman, Ky., November 22, 1957, 307 S.W.2d 556; East Kentucky Rural Electric Cooperative Corporation v. Blevins, Ky., 309 S.W.2d 345.

The damages do not strike us as being so excessive as to have been the result of passion and prejudice.

The motion for an appeal is overruled and the judgment affirmed.
Http://www.arb.ca.gov/lispub/comm/bccommlog.php?listname=scsip07

Board Meeting Comments Log 

Send Us Your Board Item Comments

Below is the Comment Log for South Coast State Implementation 

(scsip07). 

# Received From Subject Comment

Period

Date/Time 

Added to 

Database

Additional 

Form Letters

or 

Attachments

1 Schmelzer, Jason, 

California Chamber 

Commerce Comment Non-Reg 

2007-09-25 

14:45:26 

Attachment

2 

Klein, Meredith, 

Pillsbury Winthrop 

Shaw Pittman LLP

Comment on Proposed 

Inclusion of CAAP 

Measures in SIP 

Non-Reg 

2007-09-26 

11:59:53 

Attachment

Comments posted to scsip07 that were presented during the Board 

Hearing:

#

Received 

From

Subject Comment

Period

Date/Time 

Added to 

Database

Additional 

Form Letters

or 

Attachments

1 Pugh, Alex, 

Los Angales Area Chamber of 

Commerce 

2007-10-09 

14:39:17 

Attachment

2 Hernandez, Ed, 

Assemblymember Ed 

Hernandez Comment on 07-9-

4 

2007-10-09 

15:05:17 

Attachment
3 Lopez, Rachel, 

Written Testimony of Rachel 

Lopez on 07-9-4 

2007-10-09 

16:12:48 

Attachment

4 Barrera, 

Marcos, 

SCSIP07 Comment Form 

Letters 

2007-10-11 

10:05:32 

500

Attachment

5 

California, 

Trade 

Coalition, 

California Trade Coalition 

Comment of SCSIP07 

2007-10-11 

13:14:37 

Attachment

6 Rogge, 

Michael, 

California Manufactures and 

Technology Association on 

SCSIP07 

2007-10-11 

13:30:33 

Attachment

7 Bishop, Rick, 

Western Riverside Council of 

Government Support for 

SCSIP07 

2007-10-11 

13:40:23 

Attachment

We expect that any written comments received during the Board Hearing 

will be posted within one week of the Board Hearing.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-30488

Summary Calendar

DERRICK COLEMAN, 

 Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

HALCON RESOURCES CORPORATION, 

 Defendant - Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 6:15-CV-2086

Before REAVLEY, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Derrick Coleman, proceeding pro se, brings this appeal following the 

district court’s grant of summary judgment to Halcon Resources Corporation. 

Coleman does not appeal that decision, which the district court entered in 

March 2018. Instead, his appeal concerns the withdrawal of his attorney, 

which the district court approved two years earlier, in March 2016. Liberally 

 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 13, 2018

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 18-30488 Document: 00514760311 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/13/2018
No. 18-30488

2

construed, Coleman’s brief asserts a Sixth Amendment right to the assistance 

of counsel in his civil action against Halcon and a right to an adversarial 

hearing against counsel seeking withdrawal. Coleman did not present either 

argument to the district court. Rather than challenge his attorney’s 

withdrawal, Coleman proceeded pro se for the remainder of the litigation.

“Under this Circuit’s general rule, arguments not raised before the 

district court are waived and will not be considered on appeal unless the party

can demonstrate ‘extraordinary circumstances.’” AG Acceptance Corp. v. 

Veigel, 564 F.3d 695, 700 (5th Cir. 2009) (quoting N. Alamo Water Supply Corp. 

v. City of San Juan, 90 F.3d 910, 916 (5th Cir. 1996)). Coleman has not argued 

that extraordinary circumstances exist here. Accordingly, we decline to 

consider Coleman’s new arguments on appeal.

AFFIRMED.

 Case: 18-30488 Document: 00514760311 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/13/2018
EXHIBIT 32.1



                                Certification of
                            American River Bankshares
            pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
   regarding Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2006


         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections
(a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each
of the undersigned officers of American River Bankshares, a California
corporation (the "Company"), does hereby certify that:

         1.       The Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
                  ended June 30, 2006 (the "Form 10-Q") fully complies with the
                  requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
                  Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

         2.       Information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
                  material respects, the financial condition and results of
                  operations of the Company.



         Dated: August 7, 2006         By: /s/ DAVID T. TABER
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           David T. Taber
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer

         Dated: August 7, 2006         By: /s/ MITCHELL A. DERENZO
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Mitchell A. Derenzo
                                           Executive Vice President and
                                           Chief Financial Officer




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

                                       41
FW: E.O. 12866 Meeting on Boiler MACT Rule

Higgins, Cortney 

to:

Jim Eddinger, Nick Hilosky, Thomas Gillis, Mary Johnson, Amy Hambrick, Sarah Rees

05/25/2012 03:47 PM

HI all,

Attached is the handout from this meeting.

Regards,

Cortney

-----Original Appointment-----

From: Echols, Mabel E. 

Subject: E.O. 12866 Meeting on Boiler MACT Rule

When: Tuesday, May 15, 2012 11:00 AM-11:30 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada).

Where: Room 10103 New Executive Office Building

This meeting was requested by Peter Pagano, American Iron and Steel Institute.

(See attached file: 2060-AR13_2012_5_15_AISI_Handout1.pdf)