alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 09-8534.

#### Edward Jackson, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 959, 130 S. Ct. 1559,

176 L. Ed. 2d 146,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 1425.

February 22, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
No. 09-8639.

#### Ramone Stephon Jones, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 961, 130 S. Ct. 1565,

176 L. Ed. 2d 149,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 1446.

February 22, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 334 Fed. Appx. 551.
No. 11-6111.

#### Vincent Artis, Petitioner v. New York.

565 U.S. 985, 132 S. Ct. 512,

181 L. Ed. 2d 361,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7725.

October 31, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Division, Supreme Court of New York, Second Judicial Department, denied.

Same case below, 77 App. Div. 3d 848, 909 N.Y.S.2d 381.
EXHIBIT
32





Certification of Periodic
Financial Report Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350








Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and in connection with the Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q of Pinnacle Airlines Corp. for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2008, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), the undersigned Philip H. Trenary, the President and Chief Executive
Officer, and Peter D. Hunt, the Vice President and Chief Financial Officer,
hereby certify that this Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the registrant.








Signature
            Title
            Date/s/
      Philip H. Trenary
            President
      and Chief Executive Officer
            November
      6, 2008Philip
      H. Trenary/s/
      Peter D. Hunt
            Vice
      President and Chief Financial Officer
            November
      6, 2008Peter
      D. Hunt
**Exhibit 99.2**

 

**Certification Pursuant to**

**18 U.S.C. Section 1350,**

**As Adopted Pursuant to**

**Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

 

I, Steven E.Dawson, Chief Financial Officer of Radio Unica Corp. (the “Company”), pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, do hereby certify as follows:

 

1.             Thequarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended March 31,2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.             Theinformation contained in such Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I haveexecuted this Certification this 14th day of May 2003.

 

 
|   | /s/ Steven E. Dawson    |   |
|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|   | Steven E. Dawson        |
|   | Chief Financial Officer |

 

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Radio UnicaCommunications Corp and will be retained by Radio Unica Corp. and furnished tothe Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
No. 09-8462.

#### Barry Young, Petitioner v. Tom Corbett, Attorney General of Pennsylvania, et al.

559 U.S. 981, 130 S. Ct. 1710,

176 L. Ed. 2d 196,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2176.

March 1, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

 

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

MONUMENT PEAK VENTURES, LLC,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

TOSHIBA AMERICA BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, INC., 

TOSHIBA AMERICA ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS, 

INC., TOSHIBA CORPORATION,

Defendants-Appellees

______________________ 

2021-1052

______________________ 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the 

Central District of California in No. 8:19-cv-02181-DOCDFM, Judge David O. Carter.

______________________ 

JUDGMENT

______________________ 

JOHN J. EDMONDS, Edmonds & Schlather, PLLC, Houston, TX, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Also represented 

by STEPHEN F. SCHLATHER. 

 DOUGLAS FRED STEWART, Bracewell LLP, Seattle, WA, 

argued for defendants-appellees. Also represented by 

PATRICK JAMES CONNOLLY, JARED SCHUETTENHELM; DAVID 

JOHN BALL, New York, NY.

Case: 21-1052 Document: 49 Page: 1 Filed: 12/13/2021
 ______________________ 

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

 PER CURIAM (LOURIE, CLEVENGER, and PROST, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

 

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT 

 

December 13, 2021 

Date

/s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

Peter R. Marksteiner

Clerk of Court

Case: 21-1052 Document: 49 Page: 2 Filed: 12/13/2021
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l y c onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). A H / R es ear ch NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON

UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. LUCI O RI VERA PE RE Z, D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 09- 50123 D. C . No . 2 : 0 8 - c r - 0 1 0 7 3 - S VW ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e C e n tr a l D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia S t e phe n V . W i l s on, D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d M a r c h 16, 2010 ** B efo re: S C H R O E D E R , P R E G E R S O N , an d R A W L IN S O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. L uc i o R i ve r aP e r e z appe a l s f r om hi s 60- m onth s e nt e nc e i m pos e d f ol l ow i ng hi s gui l ty - pl e ac onvi c t i on f orbe i ng a n a l i e n i n pos s e s s i on of af i r e a rm a nd 

# FI LED MA R 26 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALSA H / Res ea r ch 09- 50123

a m m uni t i on, i n vi ol a t i on of 18 U . S . C . § 922( g) ( 5) . W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on pur s ua nt t o 2 8 U . S. C. § 1 2 9 1 , a n d w e a f f i rm. P er ez cont ends thatthe di stri ctcourtprocedural l y e rr ed by, am on g o ther thi ngs , f a i l i ng t o a ddr e s s hi s m i t i ga t i on a r gum e nt s tha the di d notknow tha tthe fi re arm he po ss es se d h ad an ob l i t er at ed se ri al nu m ber, and thathi s c ri m i nal i ty w as c aus e d by hi s a l c ohol i s m . H e a l s o c ont e nds tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourtdi d not a de qua t e l y j us t i f

y hi s above - G ui de l i ne s s e nt e nc e . T he r e c or d r e f l e c t s tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourtl i s t e ne d t o the pa rt i e s ’ a r gum e nt s a nd tha ti ta de qua t e l y e xpl a i ne d the s e n te n c e . Se e U

n ite d S ta tes v . G u tie rr ez - Sa n c h ez, 58 7 F . 3d 90 4, 90 8 (9th C i r. 2 0 0 9 ) . P e r e z a l s o c ont e nds tha thi s s e nt e nc e i s s ubs t a nt i ve l y unr e a s onabl e . T he re cord further r ef

l ec t s that , un der the t ot al i ty of the ci rc um st ance s, P er ez ’ s s ent ence is n o t s u b s ta n tiv e lyu n r e a s o n ab le . Se e U n ite d S ta te s v . Ca r ty , 520 F . 3d 984, 9 9 1 - 9 3 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 8 ) ( e n b a n c ) ; se e al so R i ta v. U

ni ted Stat es , 551 U . S . 338 (200 7). AF F I RME D.
**EXHIBIT 32.2****CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL 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 Quarterly Report of Alion Science and Technology Corporation (the“Corporation”) on Form 10-Q for the three months ending December 31, 2007 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Michael J. Alber,Principal Financial Officer of the Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of myknowledge: (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Corporation.Date:March 12, 2008            /s/ Michael J. Alber         Name: Michael J. Alber
No. 09-8405.

#### Adam Puchalski, Petitioner v. Illinois.

559 U.S. 956, 130 S. Ct. 1550,

176 L. Ed. 2d 140,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 1448.

February 22, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, denied.

Same case below, 378 Ill. App. 3d 1123, 352 Ill. Dec. 1009, 955 N.E.2d 185.
(1) Adjusting Price

Base Skim Milk Price for Class I $5.82 CWT 0.965 $5.6163

Advanced Butterfat Pricing Factor $2.4251 LB 3.5 $8.4879

Class I Price $14.1042

(2) Base Price

Base Skim Milk Price for Class I $5.38 CWT 0.965 $5.1917

Advanced Butterfat Pricing Factor $2.3334 LB 3.5 $8.1669

Class I Price $13.3586

(3) Change from Base Price per CWT $0.7456

(4) Price change per gallon $0.0641

(Line (3) divide by 11.63 gallons/cwt)

(5) Price change per half gallon $0.0321

Price change per quart $0.0160

Price change per pint $0.0080

Price change per 12-oz pg. $0.0058

Price change per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) $0.0048

Price change per half pint $0.0040

(6) Price adjustment per gallon $0.06

Price adjustment per half gallon $0.03

Price adjustment per quart $0.02

Price adjustment per pint $0.01

Price change per 12-oz pg. $0.01

Price adjustment per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) $0.00

Price adjustment per half pint $0.00

**No price adjustment is required if the price change per-gallon, in either direction,

is not equal to or greater than +/-$0.0100 (See paragraph (f)(1) of the clause). 

NOTE: Numbers in brackets are negative or decreases, all others are positives or increases. 

Monthly EPA Calculation for Class I Milk (Clause 52.216-9032)

Based on USDA Announcement of Advanced Prices and Pricing Factors

Effective Date: April 1, 2018
No. 09-8944.

#### George Hopkins, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 1018, 130 S. Ct. 1912,

176 L. Ed. 2d 385,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2458.

March 22, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.

Same case below, 577 F.3d 507.
# C_2016453EN.01000501.xml

| 3.12.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 453/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.12.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 453/5

---

Communication from the Kingdom of Sweden in accordance with Article 11 of the Protocol on the interpretation by the Court of Justice of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgements in civil and commercial matters

(2016/C 453/08)

In view of the amendments made to the legal order of the Kingdom of Sweden by:

| — | Act (2010:1408) on Amendments to The Instrument of Government, specifically regarding Chapter 11 Section 1 of The Instrument of Government, |
| --- | --- |

—

Act (2010:1408) on Amendments to The Instrument of Government, specifically regarding Chapter 11 Section 1 of The Instrument of Government,

| — | Act (2016:193) to repeal the (1970:417) Market Court Act, regarding the repeal of ‘Marknadsdomstolen’, |
| --- | --- |

—

Act (2016:193) to repeal the (1970:417) Market Court Act, regarding the repeal of ‘Marknadsdomstolen’,

IN ACCORDANCE with Article 11 of the Protocol on the interpretation by the Court of Justice of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgements in civil and commercial matters annexed to the Brussels Convention,

THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS SHOULD BE MADE TO THE PROTOCOL OF 3 JUNE 1971 ANNEXED TO THE BRUSSELS CONVENTION:

| (a) | the fourteenth indent of Article 2(1) should read as follows:
  ‘in Sweden, “Högsta domstolen”, “Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen” and “Arbetsdomstolen”,’. |
| --- | --- |

(a)

the fourteenth indent of Article 2(1) should read as follows:

‘in Sweden, “Högsta domstolen”, “Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen” and “Arbetsdomstolen”,’.

---
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 41 (Wednesday, March 4, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 9434]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-4541]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-65,359]


The Modesto Bee Ad Production Group, Modesto, CA; Notice of 
Termination of Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an 
investigation was initiated on February 24, 2009, in response to a 
worker petition filed on behalf of workers at The Modesto Bee, Ad 
Production Group, Modesto, California.
    The petitioning group of workers is covered by an active 
certification (TA-W-64,860) which expires on February 11, 2011.
    Consequently, further investigation in this case would serve no 
purpose, and the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 25th day of February 2009.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-4541 Filed 3-3-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
# C_2018337EN.01015901.xml

| 20.9.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 337/159 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.9.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 337/159

---

P8_TA(2017)0320

EU-Iceland Agreement concerning additional trade preferences in agricultural products ***

European Parliament legislative resolution of 12 September 2017 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Agreement in the form of an exchange of letters between the European Union and Iceland concerning additional trade preferences in agricultural products (12146/2016 — C8-0129/2017 — 2016/0293(NLE))

(Consent)

(2018/C 337/24)

The European Parliament,

| — | having regard to the draft Council decision (12146/2016), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the draft Council decision (12146/2016),

| — | having regard to the draft Agreement in the form of an exchange of letters between the European Union and Iceland concerning additional trade preferences in agricultural products (12147/2016), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the draft Agreement in the form of an exchange of letters between the European Union and Iceland concerning additional trade preferences in agricultural products (12147/2016),

| — | having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 207(4), first subparagraph, and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a)(v) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C8-0129/2017), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 207(4), first subparagraph, and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a)(v) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C8-0129/2017),

| — | having regard to Rule 99(1) and (4) and Rule 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rule 99(1) and (4) and Rule 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on International Trade (A8-0256/2017), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on International Trade (A8-0256/2017),

| 1. | Gives its consent to conclusion of the agreement; |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of Iceland. |
| --- | --- |

2.

---
**Exhibit
      32.1**




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


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**


**OF
      THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**




The
      undersigned, Yu Chang, the Chief Executive Officer of CHINA AGRITECH, INC.
      (the
“Company”), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:




1.  
      The Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007
      (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




2.  
      Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.




IN
      WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has executed this statement this 14th
      day of August, 2007.




/s/
      Yu Chang




Yu
      Chang


Chief
      Executive Officer


(Principal
      Executive Officer)




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




The
      forgoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange
      Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being filed for
      purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
      and
      is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether
      made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation
      language in such filing.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

July 31, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

130723 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 130723 

 COA: 264625 

Macomb CC: 84-000038-FC 

DANNELLE PEREZ FISHER, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 3, 2006 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). 

s0724 

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

July 31, 2006 

 Clerk
* 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

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED February 24, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-40205 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus

SOTERO JUAREZ, JR., Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:99-CR-324-7

-------------------- Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender, counsel for Sotero Juarez, Jr., has moved for leave to withdraw from this appeal and has filed a brief and supplemental letter brief, as required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Juarez has not filed a response. Our independent review of the brief, supplemental letter brief, and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2.
No. 09-722.

#### Harold Green, Petitioner v. Cleary Water, Sewer and Fire District.

559 U.S. 971, 130 S. Ct. 1691,

176 L. Ed. 2d 181,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2154.

March 1, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the Supreme Court of Mississippi denied.

Same case below, 17 So. 3d 559.
No. 09-8432.

#### Michael Nikiforakis, Petitioner v. Richard W. Stanek.

559 U.S. 981, 130 S. Ct. 1709,

176 L. Ed. 2d 196,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2178,

March 1, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the Court of Appeals of Minnesota denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4828 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4828

   To provide grants to units of local government and States to hire 
         personnel to monitor the activities of sex offenders.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 1, 2006

 Mr. Boswell introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To provide grants to units of local government and States to hire 
         personnel to monitor the activities of sex offenders.

    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 ``Cops for Kids Act''.

SEC. 2. GRANT PROGRAM.

    (a) In General.--The Attorney General may make grants to States and 
units of local government to develop programs to hire personnel to 
monitor the activities of sex offenders in the community.
    (b) Priority.--In awarding a grant under this Act, the Attorney 
General shall give priority to a unit of local government or State with 
the greatest need as determined by the number of sex offenders in such 
unit of local government or State.
    (c) Matching Funds.--To be eligible to receive a grant under this 
Act, A State or unit of local government shall contribute not less than 
50 percent of the costs of developing a sex offender monitoring 
program, including hiring personnel and providing training.

SEC. 3. USES OF FUNDS.

    A grant awarded under this Act may be used to develop a monitoring 
program of sex offenders, including--
            (1) hiring personnel;
            (2) developing training programs for such personnel; and
            (3) purchasing equipment for the program.

SEC. 4. DEFINITION.

    For purposes of this Act--
            (1) the term ``sex offender'' means an individual required 
        by law to register as a sex offender;
            (2) the term ``State'' means each of the fifty States, the 
        District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin 
        Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, 
        Guam, and American Samoa; and
            (3) the term ``unit of local government'' means any city, 
        county, township, town, borough, parish, village, or other 
        general purpose political subdivision of a State.

SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    There are authorized to be appropriated $50,000,000 for each of 
fiscal years 2007 through 2012 to carry out this Act.
                                 <all>
```
(1) Adjusting Price $19.60 CWT

(2) Base Price $20.86 CWT

(3) Change from Base Price per CWT ($1.26)

(4) Price change per gallon ($0.1083)

(Line (3) divide by 11.63 gallons/cwt)

(5) Price change per half gallon ($0.0542)

Price change per quart ($0.0271)

Price change per pint ($0.0135)

Price change per 12-oz pg. ($0.0102)

Price change per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) ($0.0085)

Price change per half pint ($0.0068)

(6) Price adjustment per gallon ($0.11)

Price adjustment per half gallon ($0.05)

Price adjustment per quart ($0.03)

Price adjustment per pint ($0.01)

Price change per 12-oz pg. ($0.01)

Price adjustment per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) ($0.01)

Price adjustment per half pint ($0.01)

NOTE: Numbers in brackets are negative or decreases, all others are positive or increases.

Monthly EPA Calculation for Class I Milk (Clause 52.216-9032 Alt. I)

Based on California Dept. of Food and Agriculture Announcement of Minimum Prices

 Effective Date: July 7, 2013
No. 09-8662.

#### Louie Bracamonte, Petitioner v. William Sullivan, Warden.

559 U.S. 996, 130 S. Ct. 1748,

176 L. Ed. 2d 220,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2245.

March 8, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.