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

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2156 

To eliminate the disparity in sentencing for cocaine offenses, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 22, 2021 

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

to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To eliminate the disparity in sentencing for cocaine offenses, 

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, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Equal Enforcement 

5 of Cocaine Laws Act’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2156 IS

1 SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF INCREASED PENALTIES FOR CO2 CAINE OFFENSES WHERE THE COCAINE IN3 VOLVED IS COCAINE BASE. 

4 (a) CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ACT.—Section 

5 401(b)(1) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 

6 841(b)(1)) is amended— 

7 (1) in subparagraph (A)— 

8 (A) in clause (ii), in the matter preceding 

9 subclause (I), by striking ‘‘5 kilograms’’ and in10 serting ‘‘280 grams’’; 

11 (B) by striking clause (iii); and 

12 (C) by redesignating clauses (iv) through 

13 (viii) as clauses (iii) through (vii), respectively; 

14 and 

15 (2) in subparagraph (B)— 

16 (A) in clause (ii), in the matter preceding 

17 subclause (I), by striking ‘‘500 grams’’ and in18 serting ‘‘28 grams’’; 

19 (B) by striking clause (iii); and 

20 (C) by redesignating clauses (iv) through 

21 (viii) as clauses (iii) through (vii), respectively. 

22 (b) CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES IMPORT AND EXPORT

23 ACT.—Section 1010(b) of the Controlled Substances Im24 port and Export Act (21 U.S.C. 960(b)) is amended— 

25 (1) in paragraph (1)— 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 2156 IS

1 (A) in subparagraph (B), in the matter 

2 preceding clause (i), by striking ‘‘5 kilograms’’ 

3 and inserting ‘‘280 grams’’; 

4 (B) by striking subparagraph (C); 

5 (C) by redesignating subparagraphs (D) 

6 through (H) as subparagraphs (C) through (G), 

7 respectively; and 

8 (D) in subparagraph (G), as so redesig9 nated, by striking the period at the end and in10 serting a semicolon; and 

11 (2) in paragraph (2)— 

12 (A) in subparagraph (B), in the matter 

13 preceding clause (i), by striking ‘‘500 grams’’ 

14 and inserting ‘‘28 grams’’; 

15 (B) by striking subparagraph (C); 

16 (C) by redesignating subparagraphs (D) 

17 through (H) as subparagraphs (C) through (G), 

18 respectively; and 

19 (D) in subparagraph (G), as so redesig20 nated, by striking the period at the end and in21 serting a semicolon. 

22 (c) APPLICABILITY TO PENDING CASES.—This sec23 tion, and the amendments made by this section, shall 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
4 

•S 2156 IS

1 apply to any sentence imposed after the date of enactment 

2 of this Act, regardless of when the offense was committed. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
1

STATE OF MISSOURI, ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiff-Respondent, ) 

 ) 

vs. ) No. SD34113 

 ) 

RYAN K. GUSKE, ) Filed: November 22, 2016

 ) 

 Defendant-Appellant. ) 

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF PHELPS COUNTY 

Honorable William E. Hickle, Circuit Judge 

AFFIRMED 

Ryan K. Guske (“Defendant”) was charged and convicted of the class D felony of 

driving while revoked. In his sole point on appeal, Defendant claims the trial court erred 

in refusing to declare a mistrial based on the prosecutor’s statement that the driving 

record of Defendant had been “redacted.” Defendant claims that the statement of the 

prosecutor planted the idea in jurors’ minds that Defendant had committed previous 

crimes, thus, unfairly and irretrievably prejudicing the jury. We find no error and affirm 

the judgment. 

 Prior to trial, the trial court agreed that numerous past convictions contained in the 

driving record (Exhibit 1) should be redacted so the jury would not see the convictions; 
2

however, the jury was allowed to see various revocations appearing on two pages of the 

driving record. (The third and fourth pages were omitted from the five-page document.) 

The trial court indicated that a “white out” should be used instead of a black marker to 

redact the offenses. As Exhibit 1 was being admitted into evidence, the prosecutor stated: 

“With that, the affidavit of the Department of Revenue from the records custodian is selfauthenticating and I believe we have sufficiently redacted the necessary information.” 

Defendant requested a mistrial because of that statement about the redaction. The State 

argued that it was obvious the driving record had been redacted because it skipped from 

page 2 to page 5. The court offered to instruct the jury to disregard the statement but 

Defendant declined any further mention of the redaction. That the document was 

redacted was not further mentioned. 

 We start with the well-known proposition that a mistrial is a drastic remedy to be 

exercised only in extraordinary circumstances in which the prejudice to a defendant 

cannot be otherwise removed. State v. Wright, 383 S.W.3d 1, 9 (Mo.App. W.D. 2012). 

We review the trial court’s refusal to grant a mistrial for an abuse of discretion. State v. 

Johnson, 901 S.W.2d 60, 62 (Mo. banc 1995). We cannot see any prejudice to 

Defendant. It is mere supposition that the jury would ascribe any other crimes to the 

redacted information. Clearly, Defendant had done something that caused his license to 

be revoked. That is a logical and relevant conclusion for the jury to draw. The 

explanation that the State gave to the court in offering an exhibit was vague, did not 

mention any crimes and only one word—redacted-- is complained about by Defendant. 

We do not find any prejudice to Defendant and no abuse of discretion by the court in 

refusing to grant a mistrial. The point is denied. The judgment is affirmed. 
3

Nancy Steffen Rahmeyer, J. - Opinion Author 

Gary W. Lynch, P.J. - Concurs 

William W. Francis, Jr., J. - Concurs
EX-10.16





 Exhibit 10.16 

THIRD AMENDMENT TO INDUSTRIAL REAL ESTATE LEASE 

THIS THIRD AMENDMENT TO INDUSTRIAL REAL ESTATE LEASE is dated as of the 16th day of December, 2013, by and between PAGODA PARTNERS LLC, an
Ohio limited liability company, having an address of 1801 E. Ninth Street, Suite 1600, Cleveland, Ohio 44114-3103 (“Landlord”), and HOMEWORKS, INC., an Ohio corporation, having an address of 7700 Northfield Road, Walton Hills, Ohio 44146
(“Tenant”). 
 RECITALS 
  

	A.	 Landlord and Tenant have entered into a certain Industrial Real Estate Lease, dated November 8, 2000, as
amended by amendments dated as of September 22, 2004 and April 12, 2005 (as amended, the “Lease”), with respect to premises known as 7700 Northfield Road, Walton Hills, Ohio. 



 

	B.	 Upon Landlord and Tenant amending the Lease as set forth in this Amendment, Landlord has agreed to consent to
(i) Homeworks, Inc., converting from a corporation to a limited liability company and changing its name to Arhaus, LLC, and (ii) John Reed transferring 25% of his interest in Tenant to affiliates of Freeman, Spogli & Co.



 NOW THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the Landlord and Tenant agree as follows: 

 

	1.	 The Lease is amended to add the following sentence to the end of Section 9.01: “If Tenant is a
limited liability company, any cumulative transfer of more than twenty-five percent (25%) of the membership interests shall require Landlord’s consent.” 



 

	2.	 This Amendment may be executed in counterparts and, when all counterpart documents are executed, the
counterparts shall constitute a single binding instrument. 


  

			
	PAGODA PARTNERS LLC,
	an Ohio limited liability company
		
	By:	 	 /s/ John P. Reed

		 	John P. Reed, Manager
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Christopher E. Smythe

		 	Name: Christopher E. Smythe, Manager
	
	HOMEWORKS, INC., an Ohio corporation
		
	By:	 	 /s/ John P. Reed

		 	John P. Reed, President


  
 -1-
REF ID:A485525 

• 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 11-07-2013 pursuant to E .0. 1352e ;1," f; , ,.,, 
~ 

; 

• \ •,:) I 1 :, --D un 11 , 1 

CLASSl FI CATI O'N: SJ;CRET - CONf'lDENTlAL - RESTRlC'rED 

1

:'l: ___ ,o1:14,..,r""1Li1.1',.,;·~~l------------------------- ~N~O: _____ .(/-~---------- REFERENCE NO.: C .;'-" ~ · 

:.:-ioICATOR GROUP:__.'J .. /

1 

.... -.ic;.t=.·'l°_...{,..,.1 ..... ) _______ MONTH: ·'.' ',. YEAR '"' // 

:~RY?TO-CHANNEL NO: ____________ CSP NO.: 7..;; -'.? . ,, 'I --

G i 2 J 4 ~ 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 lJ 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2 27 28 29 30 

uEST WISHE~_F,,~R ~DELll/Ert FJLLJ1~ISC TJ l.~ACA;\THJ;:i FnJ., SEC ,;A;t x 

·-WITliOUT Dl~LOWATIC JR OTHErt DECLARATIJN SIXTY J~P._At~ESE CAnr11Ei{I 

JJttNE DIVEj-ouilBEHS ATTACi<.ED AUFIELDS ANO PITnl fiAiLfJr1 JArJ AT 

EIGhT A :v DA•AGING 1-!Al~GARS AND PLANES JI\ Gi<JJ,W X fi-;REE 'J S---i~­

dATTLESHl?S RE?ORTE~SUN~ AND THREE JTHE~S SE~IJUSLY DA~A~~J x • ~ o <I. I I I I ~I I I I 

SeCJNJ Al::l RAID AT ELEvn; A~ x SIX TRANS?JRTS wE.tE REi'JiiTEi:. ___ _. 

li'C JAPAt~ESE F::IHCES X RE?OiHS JF ATTA.C.<.S JN WME ANi) 2U1\\ X ALL .... -,...,~-, . AIR ATTAC~S ~ADE WITH ~J~BS TJR?EDJES AND ~ACHlhE GU~S X FJ~ST 

JJJECTll/ES SEEV TJ JE Al~ AND NAVAL l~STALLATIJ~ E~~J~ ___.___.__._-+--I 

~STALLATIJNS Al\Ll St'lr'S x Th'cS AilE r:A\'rAllAN Tlv'E x ;:\E11Jr:Ts.-........ 1---1 

~ECEIVED T~AT SINGA?JRE ATTAC~ED JC Al~ V FIG~TlhG AT ~JTAb~~J 

A~~ LANDINGS ST E~~JH AT ~EVES SINY X ~~L~ JF J~lfl~H AIR HAS ~iE~ . . . . . 

C.)/~Tfl cC x LI~ IT TH Is I NF:JR:V.ATI JN TO ESSENTIAL JFF I CErtS ~ A.:•t;{i\Y x·.N:
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 January 29, 2014

s0122

Order 

Clerk

January 29, 2014

147700

UAW, UAW LOCAL 6000, MICHIGAN

CORRECTIONS ORGANIZATION SEIU

LOCAL 526, MICHIGAN PUBLIC EMPLOYEES

SEIU LOCAL 517M, and MICHIGAN STATE

EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION AFSCME

LOCAL 5,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v SC: 147700

COA: 314781

NINO ERWIN GREEN, EDWARD D.

CALLAGHAN, ROBERT LABRANT,

GOVERNOR OF MICHIGAN, and ATTORNEY

GENERAL,

Defendants-Appellees.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 15, 2013 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is GRANTED. We direct the 

Clerk to schedule the oral argument in this case for the same future session of this Court 

when it will hear oral argument in Mich Coalition of State Employee Unions v Michigan

(Docket No. 147758).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          12,660
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                14,065
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     88,361
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          20,130
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            20,804
<LOANS>                                        186,493
<ALLOWANCE>                                      3,696
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 334,753
<DEPOSITS>                                     290,539
<SHORT-TERM>                                     2,885
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              4,380
<LONG-TERM>                                        275
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         4,476
<OTHER-SE>                                      32,474
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 334,753
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 15,490
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                5,021
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   576
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                21,087
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               8,777
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,867
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           12,220
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    1,385
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  20
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  8,738
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,957
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       3,369
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,369
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.94
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.94
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    5.47
<LOANS-NON>                                        930
<LOANS-PAST>                                     1,231
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   391
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 3,735
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    1,818
<RECOVERIES>                                       394
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                3,696
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             2,276
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          1,420
        

</TABLE>
l

 Al( -4- -~- - .,_ ~. -_-

~ . Ii 

_, -:J-.-. - -

SPSIS 311. 5-Gener al 

If-

~ -

th• Jl_qnonblf1 the Soon\arT ot Siillte • 

~Kr.~~· 

REF ID: A67 331 _ ~-r ~-:....~ 

:r . .J~ . 

·- ' 

JUL 2 0 1942 

ft,.lpi ie acknowle..t-d ot 7our 1et.t.r ot June-~. 19~, 

~ \lf'd( ,.... h tranater or & :?:, i.tled c - to --... ~- la jour dtiN.;.+_ ........... - ,.~~ . mer~-... -~- ,r-- .... i. 

~ ~ !': Jr::Sx"~..t~ci:O~t'f ~~~J:n \U' ~•Jn.ale omtoQ;rapher to iour •t&tt Would accl.,Pliah mi ..Orlh1fh_1_l• norpni•at!.on of Ute OJ7ptographic Sect.ion ot t.he td.'ri at.on ot 

Cor=.®oatlon11 md a.ocrdll .. 

_ l woal.d lib to qgeat u an alternat.1.Y•.e m arranpml'lt. 

wre\v ~- tdliti.ee at 1he 017.Ptograpldc •rviae ot this m,pariment ~MY beQiJll• av..Uable to uatat,. JOU• In lbort, I llhoul.d l:Uat t.o Mk• 

ava.Ual.>1- 1,o JOU on a pi.rt. ti• bula) tlie Ml"V1.cea ot a hiaf\l;v 

'\alJ.tied ocm:d.••iond attic•X" ot \ha Si&nal S8C\11"1.t.y m.VS.atm, who 

1ln11d a\Ullrdtte +.he no:rpnlaa\1.an ot '1'._rAJr Saot.1.on_, ln•t.r..\Cs\ ~cur 

jWracinh~, Miila\ :ln .,_. pnpi.rat.ton o? !aprcived a~r-.jllia .;jWimia sid proc•~• tor_ hm'ldlln,s .... - - - -- - - .. - .... - - - -

In tJii• work the ottiau llO deaianated would ha-.. a\ h1a 

~ 

'11"".anN.il. l.liit a..-vlau ~ tJ,e en\IJ-e \eolinloil. {ni\illitlon Ol Uli 

securlli bl.v!iton ot thl•·nePirl:tin\, aikl ! feiI~cOrifiamit.· ibat 

the ~aulta ot We to~ ot ~Jlab:ora.t.t.~1_1_ ~lJ. be •uoh _l!C)l"a •t.i~tao~..!"7 to JOU. than \he work o1 · a •lncl• lndlYic!Ual. ---- -- --- -- -- -

n 

:c ~ r-· 

JUL21 ~2 PM linaer~ 7our•, "'o ~ 

'"'I\""' ,...., ~ (It"'" 

a;c:; 

zm a 

HENRY L. ST!MROT\t 

,..c r.,, w 

C-1 .s:: 

..,,:c ::Cll :!!rn :31: n 

e.arutar,y ot War. fT1 .. :a ..c:-

·o,J 

---- ------.. ""====-! 

·-~ 

_, '--~1'2 .......... 

- .:'.l 

,. I 

:::0 

rn 

C") 

l"'1 

< 

ITl 

0 

- ' 

.. - -....... -......__ -... _....,,.... - ---·· ---~ ,!(,. .r ·--~, 

-- --- ---- --- -- ---~------------

@'pproved for Release by NSA on 04-09-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a
----- -- - - .:::.s...__ 

tl Feb. 1952 

TIC!Clf. 4oculenta haft aince 1911-5 irove4 to b• ot invaluable help to 

a IWllb$r ot c~1c aectiou varJdnc on eountr1•• in the \leatern Area, UJ4. 

t. 'l"i·lurft'.r or the 4oculenta available ia iitmtly br1qing to Ugbt a441 tional 

•terial which YiU ccaailerably apm4 ita uaet'ulae••· 

'lileM 4ocumnta haft 111 ~ poy14e4 tvo ki:ala ot u•iatanco 1 

I. :Dbwct 1 Speoitic coc!eboOb 8114 Jmya atiU 1n aetiw use. 

II. Illllirecta A backgroun! ot into:r-.tion cm. ccmstruction ot 

eo&tboob, pmr&1 crntosral>hic practice, eo4e 1natruct1ana, •cur!ty c<macioua-

•••, cl'Y,Pt 'VOC&bula:ey', .mJ. the lib. Such a hi•torical. :perapectiTe 1• ot inca1cul.able 

EO 3.3(h)(2) 

PL.86-36/50 USC 3605 

I. Li1te4 below are T!CCJI 4ocumanta vbich have been at dinct 

1-le4.iate uae, 81:T1ng •pcacitie cod.ea or tab1ea in eurrent uma at the tim ot 

zieee6pt at: •inc• thens 

eclassifi ed and a ursuantt E .0. 1352 

. -

-· 

--,_ 

·~ 

.... 

... .. 

- .. '!.- r 
E03_:3(h)(2) 

PL 86-36/SOUSC 3605 

-., 

~ 

.· 
'1F-~~~v~~~~.:,,.r.-11. -~-- .. P-•..-.::r .. ,.. .. -.r _ • 

~F rtr.fn~ozr~~ii~ 

;I tliJ·J~tY.a~'~Ll U.tifieaticn ot tbeee c~HI ceXle'boob Yith actiftl.1' med 

IJ'IW. bu re•ultecl in the 8SriDg ~ :lne•t1-b1• 11\118 ~ a:llJIJY in bo0kbl'Uki1J8 

pe:taoam1, an4 ot mntbe an4 even~ ct ftll.61e 't1- iA naCl.iag the trattic 

u4 pttina: the intelligence to the s.rrtenated. ccaaumn. Sucb ialmtiticat1on, 

it llhou14 be Pointe4 out, 4oe• not talra itl.ac• once Btl4 fer all, mld:nc it poaeible 

to 41•carct the res14ue. '1'.b.e l.ut eam,ple si ftD ia nUence ~ the continuing 

U.ef'ulne•• ol lteepiq 'l'IC(Jo( 4ocu.nt• rea4iq &'V'aila'bl• u new a.11coveriea and 

JrObleaa 41acloae a need 'for -.terial ... ~11' thought '9&1.ueloea. 

I!. •o le•• 1Jlll011;ant - bl f'act 1al.e chief enc!.uring ~· o.t 

't!CCM - i• it. w.J.ue 11'l SS:rlna a h1•t.orical parapectiw on c~phic 

}tt'aetice1 at a g1ven countrT, th.WI caating tb9 light ot tha :put an preeent 

11fQb1- • 'l'h1• ligbt cOlllllDe f'rca '9ariou9 •O\ll'Cll: 0\>101.ete co4ebooka ar 

-.Cipberina lcie1lf, cw and tmeipberment .iut..--'Ucti01'19 (-.ey o.t which ace~ 

the coc1aboob an4 lra79), general. crnrtosraPhic auuala, aenan report• ot their 

~ie ;proare11 Clt'l ayatem or ft?'iau eountri••, u4 ll'ftZl aamtu.a ol4 

EO 3.3(h)(2) 

ftt"t1- trattic a.n4 i!ltra-goyermental cCD."NQOfldence • PL 86-36/50 USC 3605 

':! 
'l'b.ua TIC<J.f baa playe4. a cou14e:ra'ble role in t\ll"l'ling the art of 

L 'tllook'breakinc into a •aience. 

~;; ~m~---...:--Uk.lL 
3.3(h)(2) 

86-36/50 USC 3605 

RE_~_ ~7~,...z"L-.:a~ --

-~-1 ur (Lj .. _ -·w~~lb d 

;: 

1 

...... ~ ~-·r ~ ' .• 'ff_ 
5ffill SUEDf 

'tba valve of &l.l. tbi• pu,eraJ. backp"c>Um aterial 11 II.Olla tbe 

1-• real tor 'bein& 'beJ'0114 the l1&1 ta ot :precue --.sμreaent. 

: · ~ rrf :-:::I ~--~i!'+~~~ 

~~ 

. . 

-- - ........
# C_2014392EN.01000101.xml

| 7.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 392/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 392/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

6 November 2014

2014/C 392/01

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2517 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 143,33 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4404 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,78615 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,2027 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2045 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,5165 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,769 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 310,02 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2214 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4282 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,8020 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4530 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4281 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,7047 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6170 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,6171 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 360,61 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 13,9220 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,6521 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,6625 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 211,30 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,1760 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 56,370 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 57,5930 |
| THB | Thai baht | 41,085 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,1783 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 16,9925 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 76,9580 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2517

JPY

Japanese yen

143,33

DKK

Danish krone

7,4404

GBP

Pound sterling

0,78615

SEK

Swedish krona

9,2027

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2045

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,5165

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,769

HUF

Hungarian forint

310,02

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2214

RON

Romanian leu

4,4282

TRY

Turkish lira

2,8020

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4530

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4281

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,7047

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6170

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,6171

KRW

South Korean won

1 360,61

ZAR

South African rand

13,9220

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,6521

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,6625

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 211,30

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,1760

PHP

Philippine peso

56,370

RUB

Russian rouble

57,5930

THB

Thai baht

41,085

BRL

Brazilian real

3,1783

MXN

Mexican peso

16,9925

INR

Indian rupee

76,9580

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
#### Loucheine vs. Strouse and another.

Appeals iít Supeeme Couet. *(1) Extra damages or costs, when awarded. (2) Hoto appellant may dismiss Ms appeal.*

1. Where the court is satisfied that an appeal, though not prosecuted, was taken in good faith, extra damages or costs will not be awarded. W. *W. Mut. L. Ins. Co. v. Irish,*38 Wis., 361.

2. Hereafter appellants in this court will not.be allowed to dismiss their appeals, except by consent or upon notice to the respondents. -

APPEAL from the Circuit Court for *La Crosse*County.

On the 20th of December, 1878, this court, on motion of the appellants (the defendants), dismissed the appeal, with costs against the appellants. On the 17th of January following, the respondent moved for an allowance to him of damages for his delay, in addition to interest upon his judgment, and double costs, together with costs of the motion, or, in lieu thereof, for an order reinstating the appeal and for a judgment of affirmance. R. S., 776, see. 2951.

*Gharles W.*Bimn, for the motion.

*Wm. F. Vilas, contra.*

*488Ryan, 0. J.

This motion is denied on the merits. The affidavit presented for the appellants has satisfied the court that the appeal, though not prosecuted, was taken in good faith. In such a case the court will not award extra damages or costs. *N. W. M. L. Ins. Co. v. Irish,*38 Wis., 361.

But the motion has suggested to the court the necessity of providing against the dismissal, by appellants *ex parte,*of appeals taken in bad faith, so as to evade the statute providing for extra damages and costs upon affirmance.

And hereafter appellants will not be allowed to dismiss their appeals, except by consent or upon notice to the respondents.

*By the Court.*— Motion denied.
1 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. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS For the Fifth Circuit

No. 98-30712 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

VERSUS

JAMES GORDON KELLER,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana

(97-CR-102-ALL-B-M2)

March 25, 1999
Before DAVIS, DUHÉ, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 1

James Gordon Keller appeals the denial of his habeas corpus

petition for failure to exhaust his admi nistrative remedies.

Keller argues that he is not required to exhaust his administrative

remedies because doing so would be futile. Keller has not

demonstrated the futility of administrative review. S ee Fuller v.

Rich

, 11 F.3d 61, 62 (5th Ci r. 1994). Accordingly, the district

court did not abuse its discretion in denying Keller’s petition for

failure to exhaust his administrative remedies. S ee Fuller

, 11

F.3d at 62; United States v. Dowling , 962 F.2d 390, 393 (5th Cir.

1992).2

AFFIRMED.