alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

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

 The Honorable Betty Binns Fletcher, Senior Circuit Judge for the Ninth **

Circuit Court of Appeals, fully participated in the case and concurred in the

judgment prior to her death.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

ZUBERI SEEL STEEL,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 12-10038

D.C. No. 4:11-CR-00149-PJH-1

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Phyllis J. Hamilton, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted October 16, 2012

San Francisco, California

Before: B. FLETCHER , D.W. NELSON, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges. **

Zuberi Seel Steel appeals the denial of a motion to suppress evidence of a

firearm he was charged with possessing. This Court reviews de novo a district

FILED

NOV 08 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2

court’s denial of a motion to suppress, and reviews the district court’s factual

findings underlying the denial of the motion for clear error. United States v.

Shetler, 665 F.3d 1150, 1156 (9th Cir. 2011). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

The district court did not err in finding that reasonable suspicion existed to

warrant a Terry stop. A police officer may conduct an investigatory stop, or Terry

stop, to prevent ongoing or imminent crime. Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 30 (1968). 

Here, Officer Sanchez “observe[d] unusual conduct which [led] him reasonably to

conclude in light of his experience that criminal activity may [have] be[en]

afoot . . . .” Id.

The district court also correctly determined that Steel’s detention was a valid

investigatory stop under Terry, not an unlawful arrest. Whether an unlawful arrest

occurs depends on whether the use of force in detaining the suspect was justified

under the totality of the circumstances, weighing the intrusiveness of the stop

against the justification for using such tactics. United States v. Miles, 247 F.3d

1009, 1012 (9th Cir. 2001). In applying this test, the court considers “the

aggressiveness of the methods used by police and the degree to which the suspect’s

liberty was restricted,” and “whether the officer had sufficient basis to fear for his

or her safety warranting a more intrusive action.” United States v. Rousseau, 257
3

F.3d 925, 929 (9th Cir. 2001). Here, Sanchez’s use of force in stopping Steel and

handcuffing him was justified given Sanchez’s reasonable safety concerns. Steel

did not cooperate with Sanchez’s repeated commands to stop, did not comply with

Sanchez’s order to put his hands behind his back, and made a movement with his

right elbow towards his right side — a gesture which made Sanchez concerned that

Steel was either carrying a firearm or attempting to discard contraband. 

AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Consolidated Statement of Financial Condition at September 30, 2000 (Unaudited)
and the Consolidated Statement of Income for the three months ended September
30, 2000 (Unaudited) and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                          61,125
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               212,767
<PP&E>                                       1,693,261
<DEPRECIATION>                               (573,681)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,251,937
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          244,494
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       111,671
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,895,772
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,251,937
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               684,951
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (684,951)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (684,951)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (684,951)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.006)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.006)


</TABLE>
1 C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Xochytl Greer v. Wesley Michael Melcher

Appellate case number: 01

- 1 9

- 00 2 87

- CV

Trial court case number: 2 0 17

- 4 1 80 8

Trial court: 2 45 th District Court of Harris County

A ppellant, Xochytl Greer

, has filed a motion for review of the trial court’s order sustaining the court reporter’s contest to appellant’s statement of inability to pay costs.

See T EX

. R. C IV

. P. 145(g)(1). Accordingly, we direct the trial court clerk to prepare and file a supplemental clerk’s record containing:

• Order on C o ntest to Petitioner’s Statement of Inability to Pay Costs, signed on May 3, 2019

. And, we direct court reporter

, Doug las Fa u lin

, (or the official or substitute court rep orter ) to prepare and file a reporter’s record of the May 3, 2019 hearing on the contest to appellant’s statement of inability to pay costs

. See T EX

. R. C IV

. P. 145(g) (3).

The supplemental clerk’s record and reporter’s record of the May 3, 2019 hearing shall be prepared and filed without charge to appellant. See T EX

. R. C IV

. P. 145( g ) ( 3 )

. The supplemental clerk’s record and reporter’s record of the May 3, 2019 hearing
are due to be filed in this Court no later than 14 days from the date of this order

.
It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Julie Countiss

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: __ May 21, 2019

__
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1679 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1679

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To ensure that the Federal Emergency Management Agency's current 
  efforts to modernize its grant management system includes applicant 
        accessibility and transparency, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``FEMA Accountability, Modernization 
and Transparency Act of 2017''.

SEC. 2. REQUIREMENTS.

    (a) In General.--The Administrator of the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency shall ensure the ongoing modernization of the grant 
systems for the administration of assistance under the Robert T. 
Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 
et seq.) includes the following:
            (1) An online interface, including online assistance, for 
        applicants to complete application forms, submit materials, and 
        access the status of applications.
            (2) Mechanisms to eliminate duplication of benefits.
            (3) If appropriate, enable the sharing of information among 
        agencies and with State, local, and tribal governments, to 
        eliminate the need to file multiple applications and speed 
        disaster recovery.
            (4) Any additional tools the Administrator determines will 
        improve the implementation of this section.
    (b) Implementation.--To the extent practicable, the Administrator 
shall deliver the system capabilities described in subsection (a) in 
increments or iterations as working components for applicant use.

SEC. 3. NO ADDITIONAL FUNDS AUTHORIZED.

    No additional funds are authorized to carry out the requirements of 
this Act. Such requirements shall be carried out using amounts 
otherwise authorized.

            Passed the House of Representatives May 2, 2017.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
115th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 1679

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

   To ensure that the Federal Emergency Management Agency's current 
  efforts to modernize its grant management system includes applicant 
        accessibility and transparency, and for other purposes.
```
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsMemoranda of Understanding

# Memoranda of Understanding - 2015

*This page includes links to files in non-HTML format. See Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools for more information.*

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Monday, March 21, 2022

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - 2023
          - 2022
          - 2021
          - 2020
          - 2019
          - 2018
          - 2017
          - 2016
          - 2015
          - 2013
          - 2011
          - 2009
          - 2008
          - 2007
          - 2006
          - 2005
          - 2004
          - 2003
          - 2002
          - 2001
          - 2000
          - 1999
          - 1998
          - 1997
          - 1996
          - 1995
          - 1994
          - 1993
          - 1992
          - 1991
          - 1990
          - 1989
          - 1988
          - 1987
          - 1986
          - 1985
          - 1984

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

                - The Commission
                - License Renewal Generic Environmental Review
                - Job Openings
                - Palisades Restart
                - Environmental Justice 
                - Pilgrim Water Releases
                - Monticello Tritium Issue
                - International Strategy 2021-2025
                - Tribal Liaison Program
                - MAP-X
                - Transformation at the NRC - Updated
                - OIG Hotline
                - Rulemaking Activity
                - Commission Documents
                - Advanced Reactors
                - Nuclear Security
                - Strategic Plan

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Monday, March 21, 2022
* 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. 06-31282

HOPE MEDICAL GROUP FOR WOMEN, et al

Plaintiffs-Appellants-Cross-Appellees

v.

KIM EDWARD LEBLANC, M.D., et al

Defendants-Appellees-Cross-Appellants

Appeal from the United States District Court 

of the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 06-CV-9176

Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Having reviewed the district court’s order, the parties’ briefs, and the

record, we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we AFFIRM. 

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

December 11, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
HomeNRC LibraryDocument Collections

# Interim Staff Guidance

*Documents issued to clarify or to address issues not discussed in a Standard Review Plan (SRP).*
        - Spent Fuel Storage and Transportation
        - License Applications
        - License Renewal
        - Research and Test Reactors
        - Operating Reactors
        - Fuel Cycle Safety, Safeguards, and Environmental Reviews
        - High-Level Waste Repository Safety
        - Digital Instrumentation & Controls
        - Combined License (COL), Design Certification (DC), and Early Site Permit (ESP) Applications for New Reactors
        - Nuclear Security
        - Emergency Planning for Nuclear Power Plants
        - Japan Lessons Learned
        - Materials, Decommissioning, and Associated Environmental Management

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Monday, May 9, 2022

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - Advisory Committee on Medical Uses of Isotopes
          - Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste and Materials
          - Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
          - Agreement State Action Items
          - Agreement State Communications
          - ASLBP
          - Commission Documents
          - Congressional Documents
          - Electronic Government (E-Gov) Documents
          - Enforcement Documents
          - Enforcement Petition (2.206)
          - Events, Reports Associated with
          - Fact Sheets & Brochures
          - Federal Register Notices (NRC)
          - Forms (NRC)
          - For the Record
          - Generic Communications
          - Generic Issues
          - Government Information Locator Service (GILS)
          - Human Factors Information System
          - Inspection Manual
          - OIG Reports
          - IMPEP Reviews of NRC Programs
          - Interim Staff Guidance
          - Management Directives
          - Memoranda of Understanding
          - News Releases
          - NMSS Procedures
          - NRC Datasets
          - NRC Infographics
          - NRC Maps
          - NUREG-Series Publications
          - OMB Exhibit 300s
          - Personal Identity Verification
          - Previous Site Additions
          - Regulations (NRC, 10 CFR)
          - Regulatory Guides (by Division)
          - Research Information Letters
          - Rulemaking Documents
          - Technical Letter Reports

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

                - The Commission
                - License Renewal Generic Environmental Review
                - Job Openings
                - Palisades Restart
                - Environmental Justice 
                - Pilgrim Water Releases
                - Monticello Tritium Issue
                - International Strategy 2021-2025
                - Tribal Liaison Program
                - MAP-X
                - Transformation at the NRC - Updated
                - OIG Hotline
                - Rulemaking Activity
                - Commission Documents
                - Advanced Reactors
                - Nuclear Security
                - Strategic Plan

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Monday, May 9, 2022
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Resulting from International Agreements

# RELAP5/MOD3.2 Validation Using BETHSY Test 6.9a (NUREG/IA-0188)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/IA-0188 (PDF 1.53 MB)

## Publication Information

**Date Published:** August 2000

**Prepared by:** S. Bouabdallah

NNC Ltd. Booths Hall Chelford Road Knutsford, Cheshire GB–WA16 8QZ UNITED KINGDOM

**Prepared as part of:** The Agreement on Research Participation and Technical Exchange under the International Code Application and Maintenance Program (CAMP)

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

This report provides the results of a RELAP5/MOD3.2 calculation of Test 6.9a which was carried out on the BETHSY facility. The purpose of the calculation is to provide validation evidence for the use of RELAP5/MOD3.2 for application to faults at Sizewell B which can occur when the plant is in Modes 5 and 6 (and including the use of nozzle dams).

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
Exhibit 32.1

Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley act of 2001.

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

In connection with the Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on Form 10-KSB of AmeriChip International Inc.
(the "Company") for the period ended November 30, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Marc
Walther, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2001,
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 result of operations of the
Company.

Dated: June 14 , 2005

                                        /s/ Marc Walther
                                        ----------------
                                        Marc Walther, Chief Executive Officer
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1720 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the rules applicable 

to length of service award plans. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 24, 2017 

Mr. KING of New York (for himself and Mr. PASCRELL) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify 

the rules applicable to length of service award plans. 

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 ‘‘Length of Service 

5 Award Program Cap Adjustment Priority Act’’ or the 

6 ‘‘LOSAP CAP Act’’. 

7 SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF RULES APPLICABLE TO LENGTH 

8 OF SERVICE AWARD PLANS. 

9 (a) MAXIMUM DEFERRAL AMOUNT.—Clause (ii) of 

10 section 457(e)(11)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1720 IH

1 1986 is amended by striking ‘‘$3,000’’ and inserting 

2 ‘‘$6,000’’. 

3 (b) COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT.—Subparagraph 

4 (B) of section 457(e)(11) of such Code is amended by add5 ing at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘(iii) COST OF LIVING ADJUST7 MENT.—In the case of taxable years begin8 ning after December 31, 2017, the Sec9 retary shall adjust the $6,000 amount 

10 under clause (ii) at the same time and in 

11 the same manner as under section 415(d), 

12 except that the base period shall be the 

13 calendar quarter beginning July 1, 2016, 

14 and any increase under this paragraph 

15 that is not a multiple of $500 shall be 

16 rounded to the next lowest multiple of 

17 $500.’’. 

18 (c) APPLICATION OF LIMITATION ON ACCRUALS.— 

19 Subparagraph (B) of section 457(e)(11) of such Code, as 

20 amended by subsection (b), is amended by adding at the 

21 end the following: 

22 ‘‘(iv) SPECIAL RULE FOR APPLICA23 TION OF LIMITATION ON ACCRUALS FOR

24 CERTAIN PLANS.—In the case of a length 

25 of service award plan that is a defined benVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:02 Mar 29, 2017 Jkt 069200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1720.IH H1720

lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1720 IH

1 efit plan (as defined in section 414(j)), the 

2 limitation on the annual deferral under 

3 clause (ii) shall apply to the actuarial 

4 present value of the aggregate amount of 

5 length of service awards accruing with re6 spect to any year of service. Such actuarial 

7 present value shall be calculated using rea8 sonable actuarial assumptions and methods 

9 assuming payment shall be made under the 

10 most valuable form of payment of the 

11 length of service award under the program 

12 with payment commencing at the later of 

13 the earliest age at which unreduced bene14 fits are payable under the program or the 

15 participant’s current age.’’. 

16 (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

17 this Act shall apply to taxable years beginning after De18 cember 31, 2017. 

Æ 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
---

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

I, Robert Wyllie, Chief Financial Officer of Balaton Power
  Inc. (the “Company”), hereby 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:

| | (i)  | the Annual Report on Form 20-F of the Company for
        the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 (the “Annual Report”)
        fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
        Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | ---- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | (ii) | the information contained in the Annual Report fairly
        presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
        of operations of the Company.                                                                                   

| | By:    | /s/ Robert Wyllie      
| | ------ | -----------------------
| |        |                        
| | Name:  | Robert Wyllie          
| | Title: | Chief Financial Officer
| | Date:  | June 29, 2005          

This written statement is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange
  Commission as an exhibit to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 20-F.
  A signed original of this 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.


This certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form
  20-F pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not,
  except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for
  purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
  "Exchange Act"). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by
  reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the
  Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates
  it by reference.

---