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

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 26 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 26

  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the percentage 
    depletion allowance for certain hardrock mines, and to use the 
       resulting revenues from such repeal for deficit reduction.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

             January 25 (legislative day, January 5), 2011

 Mrs. Shaheen introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the percentage 
    depletion allowance for certain hardrock mines, and to use the 
       resulting revenues from such repeal for deficit reduction.

    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 ``Elimination of Double Subsidies for 
the Hardrock Mining Industry Act of 2011''.

SEC. 2. REPEAL OF PERCENTAGE DEPLETION ALLOWANCE FOR CERTAIN HARDROCK 
              MINES.

    (a) In General.--Section 613(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 is amended by inserting ``(other than hardrock mines located on 
lands subject to the general mining laws or on land patented under the 
general mining laws)'' after ``In the case of the mines''.
    (b) General Mining Laws Defined.--Section 613 of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(f) General Mining Laws.--For purposes of subsection (a), the 
term `general mining laws' means those Acts which generally comprise 
chapters 2, 12A, and 16, and sections 161 and 162 of title 30 of the 
United States Code.''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2011.
    (d) Use of Resulting Revenues for Deficit Reduction.--The revenues 
resulting from the amendment made by subsection (a) shall not be 
appropriated or otherwise made available for any fiscal year, resulting 
in a reduction of the Federal budget deficit for such fiscal year. If 
in any fiscal year there is no Federal budget deficit (determined 
without regard to such revenues), such revenues shall be used for 
reducing the Federal debt in such manner as the Secretary of the 
Treasury considers appropriate.
                                 <all>
```
United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

 

Nos. 08-2175

08-2217

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Appellee,

v.

ADOLFO VERDUGO and 

RAFAEL FERNÁNDEZ-ROQUE,

Defendants, Appellants.

 

ERRATA SHEET

The opinion of this Court issued on August 19, 2010, is amended as follows:

On page 22, footnote 2, lines 5, replace "Berghius, 130 S. Ct. at 2264" with "Berghuis v.

Thompkins, 130 S. Ct. 2250, 2264 (2010)"
### VMTInfo Carlin, James to: Tim Russ 02/26/201012:46 PM Thismessagehasbeenforwarded.

Tim the Total VMT which includes both paved and unpaved roads for the whole nonattainment area was 54,877,360 per year. Please let me know if you get this e-mail.asit is an old email address, and I am curious as to why you need the info. Thanks,
January 2 7 , 2012

Derrick Lastinger

ASPCRO President

Georgia Department of Agriculture

Structural Pest Section

19 Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive SW

Atlanta, Georgia 30334

- 4201

Dear Mr. Lastinger,

This letter is in response to your request for support of your organization’s letter (en closed ) to

the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regarding revisions to the label language for

professional and agricultural rodenticide labels

.

The AAPCO Board r eviewed a previous draft and support s your recommendations to EPA

contained in the letter. We appreciate ASPCRO’s work on this issue and look forward to EPA’s

response

.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.

Sincerely,

Chuck And rews

AAPCO President

(916) 445

- 3984

Enclosure

cc: Grier Stayton , Executive Secretary, AAPCO

Rick Keigwin

, Director, EPA Pesticide Re

- Evaluation Division , U.S. EPA

John Scott, Pesticide Program Manager, Colorado Dept. of Agriculture

Bonnie Rabe, Director, New Mexico Dept. of Agriculture

Steve Dwinell

, SFIREG Chair

Bob Rosenberg, Senior Vice President, NPMA
Highest Highest12-Hour Rolling Averages Hour Rolling Averages Hour Rolling Averages (7/1/04-1/1/08)

David A Klarich David A Klarich to: David Ogulei 03/20/2012 03:59 PM

History: This message has been forwarded.

David,

During our March 8 conference call, you were curious why some of the maximum 12-hour rolling 

average (HRA) metals feed values in Veolia’s February 25, 2010 Significant Modification were different 

from those that the USEPA had documented. Specifically, the values for Unit 2 SVM, Unit 3 SVM, and 

Unit 4 LVM were different. In Table 1 from the agenda for the March 8 call, you have maximum rates 

listed for the time period 7/1/04 to 1/1/08 in column 4. After reviewing documents from that time 

period, I discovered a summary spreadsheet that showed maximum 12 HRA feedrates through 5/31/08. 

In this document, the maximum rate for Unit 2 SVM is 91 lbs/hr, for Unit 3 SVM is 82 lbs/hr, and for 

Unit 4 LVM is 77 lbs/hr. These rates were the result of operations during the first five months of 2008. 

These are the maximum 12 HRA values that are in the resubmittal of the Significant Modification on 

February 25, 2010. Veolia had apparently included these updated values in this document.

Should you have any further questions , please contact me.

Dave. 

Dave Klarich

Veolia ES Technical Solutions, L.L.C.

#7 Mobile Avenue

Sauget, IL 62201

618-271-2804, X120 office

618-271-9704 fax

david.klarich@veoliaes.com

http://www.veoliaes.com/

Service first. Safety always. 

This e-mail message from Veolia ES Technical Solutions is for the sole use of the intended 

recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, 

disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please communicate 

with the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and delete same from 

all computers.
Mark C. MARIEN, Appellant, v. Sarah E. MARIEN-SKOLNIK, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-4258

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed November 8, 2017.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
v237484_ex10-6 -- Converted by SECPublisher 2.1.1.8, created by BCL Technologies Inc., for SEC Filing
* 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. 96-50868

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JESSE GARZA,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. SA-95-CA-0562

- - - - - - - - - -

February 27, 1998

Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jesse Garza, federal prisoner # 43437-080, has filed a

“renewed motion for reinstatement,” which this court construes as

a motion for reconsideration of this court's single-judge order

denying a certificate of appealability (COA). See Fed. R. App.

P. 27(c). Garza was not required to obtain a COA to appeal the

denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. Lindh v. Murphy, 117 S.

Ct. 2059, 2068 (1997). Therefore, his motion for reconsideration
No. 96-50868

-2-

is GRANTED and the March 19, 1997, order denying COA is

RESCINDED. 

For essentially the same reasons this court denied COA,

Garza's appeal of the denial of his § 2255 motion is DISMISSED

for lack of jurisdiction, and the appeal of the denial of Garza’s

post-judgment motion is AFFIRMED because Garza failed to raise an

argument specifically challenging that denial. 

MOTION GRANTED. ORDER DENYING COA RESCINDED. DISMISSED IN

PART FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION AND AFFIRMED IN PART.
Exhibit
32.2





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 quarterly report of Axion International Holdings, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2009 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
Michael W. Johnson, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:





(1)
The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; 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/ Gary Anthony >> 
       >
              >Gary
      Anthony >> 
       >
              >Chief
      Financial Officer >>February
      22, 2010 >
Robert GOODIE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D15-4261

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed November 15, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
      a.
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to
us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;b.
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused
such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under
our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial
statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles;c.
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; andd.
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants
most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in
the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal
control over financial reporting; and
  a.
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal control over financial reporting
which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants
ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; andb.
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting.
 Date: June 6, 2008
    
    
    
    /s/ Robert A. Virtue

Robert A. Virtue
President and Chief Executive Officer of Virco Mfg.
Corporation
(Principal Executive Officer)
 16
**EXHIBIT 99.1**

 

**CRUSADE MANAGEMENT LIMITED (MANAGER)**

**OFFICER’S CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE**

 

The undersigned officer of Crusade Management Limited, a company organized under the laws of New South Wales, Australia (“CML”), hereby certifies on behalf of CML and on his own behalf for purposes of the Crusade Global Trust No. 2 of 2004 Class A1 Mortgage Backed Floating Rate Notes (the “Notes”), as follows:

 

| 1. | I am a duly appointed, qualified and acting Officer of CML, |
|----|-------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| 2. | I am duly authorized to execute and deliver this Officer’s Certificate on behalf of CML; and |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| 3. | To the best of my knowledge, the Issuer Trustee has complied with all conditions and covenants under the Transaction Documents, for the Crusade Global Trust No. 2 of 2004 issue of Notes for the period between October 1, 2004 and the end of the Manager’s fiscal year on September 30, 2005. |
|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

Capitalized terms used and not defined herein shall have the meanings assigned to such terms in the Note Trust Deed related to the above-referenced issue of Notes.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed my name as of December21, 2005.

 

 

|   |   /s/  G. M.  Bartlett                                                                                                            |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | By:           G.M. BartlettTitle:        Director |
# Official Journal C 151A/2010

| | ISSN 1725-2423
  doi:10.3000/17252423.CA2010.151.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 151A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5310 June 2010 |

ISSN 1725-2423

doi:10.3000/17252423.CA2010.151.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 151A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5310 June 2010

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Medicines Agency |
| 2010/C 151A/01 | Recruitment for the European Medicines Agency (London) | 1 |
| 2010/C 151A/02 | Call for expression of interest for contract agents for temporary assignments (London) | 3 |

Notice No

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Medicines Agency

2010/C 151A/01

Recruitment for the European Medicines Agency (London)

1

2010/C 151A/02

Call for expression of interest for contract agents for temporary assignments (London)

3

---

REVIEW OF COMPETITION C A OJs

Please find below the list of C A published during the present year.

Unless otherwise indicated, OJs are published in all language versions.

| 5 | (FR) |
| --- | --- |
| 9 | |
| 19 | (FR) |
| 23 | (DE/ES/PT) |
| 28 | |
| 48 | |
| 53 | |
| 56 | |
| 57 | |
| 60 | |
| 61 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 62 | |
| 64 | |
| 66 | (BG/RO) |
| 67 | (ES) |
| 70 | (PT) |
| 73 | (FI) |
| 74 | (SV) |
| 91 | |
| 95 | |
| 104 | |
| 110 | |
| 116 | (ET) |
| 119 | |
| 129 | (EL) |
| 137 | (LT/LV/MT) |
| 138 | (BG/CS/LT/PL/RO/SK) |
| 143 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 144 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 146 | (DA/FI/MT) |
| 147 | (FI) |
| 149 | (IT) |
| 150 | (BG/CS/LT/PL/RO/SK) |
| 151 | |

5

(FR)

9

19

(FR)

23

(DE/ES/PT)

28

48

53

56

57

60

61

(DE/EN/FR)

62

64

66

(BG/RO)

67

(ES)

70

(PT)

73

(FI)

74

(SV)

91

95

104

110

116

(ET)

119

129

(EL)

137

(LT/LV/MT)

138

(BG/CS/LT/PL/RO/SK)

143

(DE/EN/FR)

144

(DE/EN/FR)

146

(DA/FI/MT)

147

(FI)

149

(IT)

150

(BG/CS/LT/PL/RO/SK)

151

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
* 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 December 10, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-20479 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus PAUL JAMES SANDERS, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-00-CR-796-ALL

-------------------- Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Paul James Sanders appeals his conviction and sentence for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1). Citing the Supreme Court’s decisions in Jones v. United States , 529 U.S. 848 (2000); United States v. Morrison , 529 U.S. 598 (2000); and United States v. Lopez , 514 U.S. 549 (1995), Sanders argues that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) can no longer constitutionally be construed to cover the intrastate possession of a firearm merely due to the fact that it traveledNo. 03-20479 -2- across state lines at some point in the past. Accordingly, Sanders argues that the evidence, which stipulated that the firearm he possessed in Texas was manufactured in California, was insufficient to establish the interstate commerce element of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) and thus insufficient to support his conviction. Sanders raises his argument solely to preserve it for possible Supreme Court review. As he acknowledges, his argument is foreclosed by existing Fifth Circuit precedent. See United States v. Cavazos , 288 F.3d 706, 712 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 537 U.S. 910 (2002); United States v. Daugherty , 264 F.3d 513, 518 (5th Cir. 2001), cert. denied , 534 U.S. 1150 (2002); United States v. Gresham , 118 F.3d 258, 264-65 (5th Cir. 1997); United States v. Kuban , 94 F.3d 971, 973 (5th Cir. 1996); United States v. Rawls , 85 F.3d 240, 242-43 (5th Cir. 1996). Because the argument is foreclosed, the Government has moved for a summary affirmance of the district court’s judgment. The motion is GRANTED. The judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED. AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
```

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 72 (Thursday, April 16, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17664-17665]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-8715]

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary of Defense

[Docket ID: USAF-2009-0025]

Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records

AGENCY: Department of the Air Force, DoD.

ACTION: Notice to delete a system of records.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of the Air Force proposes to delete a system of 
records to its inventory of record systems subject to the Privacy Act 
of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended.

DATES: The changes will be effective on May 18, 2009 unless comments 
are received that would result in a contrary determination.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to the Air Force Privacy Act Officer, Office 
of Warfighting Integration and Chief Information Officer, SAF/XCPPI, 
1800 Air Force Pentagon, Suite 220, Washington, DC 20330-1800.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ben Swilley at (703) 696-6648.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Department of the Air Force systems of 
records notices subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as 
amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available 
from the address above.
    The Department of the Air Force proposes to delete a system of 
records notice in its inventory of record systems

[[Page 17665]]

subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended. The 
proposed deletion is not within the purview of subsection (r) of the 
Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the 
submission of a new or altered system report.

Morgan E. Frazier,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
F036 AFPC I

System name:
    Airmen Utilization Records System (June 11, 1997, 62 FR 31793).

Reason:
    This is a duplicate system that is now merged with F036 AFPC M, 
Officer Utilization Records System (June 11, 1997, 62 FR 31793). There 
should be only one system for Utilization Records System.

[FR Doc. E9-8715 Filed 4-15-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
```
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2613 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Pyrithiobac-sodium. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 7, 2012 

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

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Pyrithiobacsodium. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PYRITHIOBAC-SODIUM. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.13.45 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 Pyrithiobac-sodium) is amended by striking the date in 

7 the effective period column and inserting ‘‘12/31/2015’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2613 IS

1 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

2 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### Fahd Faisal AL KARSHI, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 02-73236.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*784Submitted April 15, 2004.*

Decided May 20, 2004.

Samuel Maina, Law Offices of S. Ouya Maina, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.

Fahd Faisal A1 Karshi, San Francisco, CA, pro se.

Regional Counsel, Western Region, Immigration *&*Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Earle B. Wilson, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: WALLACE, KOZINSKI and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

We affirm the BIA’s finding that A1 Karshi suffered no past persecution, and therefore no presumption of future persecution arises. A1 Karshi did not present sufficient evidence to support a finding of future persecution. *See Halaim v. INS,*358 F.3d 1128, 1131-32 (9th Cir.2004).

PETITION DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
B.R., a Child, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D17-1502

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 8, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

*Affirmed.*