alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Read the magazine story to find out   more.**Amaranth seeds (left) and amaranth flour (right), above the final product, amaranth cookies.Click the image for more information about
it.For further reading
Scientists Develop New Way to Make Food Ingredient from Rice Bran Oil
Enhancing Yogurt with Healthful Fiber From Oats
Making White Layer Cakes with More Fiber, Less Fat Ancient Grains Make Healthful, Tasty Cookies By Sandra Avant
March 16, 2016 New chia-oat and amaranth-oat mixtures developed by U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) scientists may be used to make healthful foods in the future. Chemist George E. Inglett and his colleagues at Agricultural Research Service's (ARS) National Center for Agricultural Utilization Research (NCAUR) in Peoria, Illinois, examined the physical properties of chia and amaranth that contain lysine—an essential amino acid. In one experiment, scientists blended amaranth flour with oat products containing beta-glucan, which is associated with lowering blood cholesterol, to make nutritious, gluten-free sugar cookies. Amaranth-oat composites, cookies and doughs were compared with those made of amaranth or wheat flour alone. Amaranth dough had improved water-holding capacity compared with wheat, and amaranth cookies were acceptable in all aspects. The cookies had improved nutritional value and physical properties. In another experiment, scientists found the same results for sugar cookies made from chia-oat composites. The scientists dry-blended Nutrim, oat bran concentrate and whole wheat flour with finely ground chia to make the mixture. Chia seeds are high in oil and rich in polyunsaturated fatty acids, particularly omega 3, which help lower blood cholesterol and prevent coronary heart disease. In this research, published in the *Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture* and the *Journal of Food Research* in 2014, Inglett demonstrated that amaranth-oat and chia-oat composites have desirable physical qualities such as improved texture. These qualities, along with the ancient grains' nutritional value, may make them desirable ingredients for healthful foods. One of the ingredients used to make the cookies, Nutrim, is a commercial product made from barley and oats developed years ago by Inglett to help lower blood cholesterol. ARS is USDA's principal intramural scientific research agency. Read more about this work in the March 2016 issue of *AgResearch*.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Richard Rivera, Appellant.—

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Felig, J.), rendered January 4,1982, convicting him of attempted burglary in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues that could be raised upon appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted. *(See, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf. People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606.) Titone, J. P., O’Connor, Rubin and Lawrence, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2159 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2159

        To extend the duty suspension on methanol, sodium salt.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 5, 2005

 Mr. Brown of South Carolina introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
        To extend the duty suspension on methanol, sodium salt.

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

SECTION 1. METHANOL, SODIUM SALT.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.01.36 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to methanol, sodium salt) is 
amended by striking ``12/31/2006'' and inserting ``12/31/2008''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
NO. 07-04-0048-CV IN THE COUR

T OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVEN TH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO PANEL B MARCH 2, 2 004

______________________________ IN RE R. WAYNE JOHN SON, RELATOR

_______________________________ Before JOHNSON, C.J., and QUINN and CAMPBE LL, JJ. MEMORA NDUM OPIN ION Relator, R. Wayne Johnson, seeks i ssuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondent

Caroline Woodburn, Distric t Clerk of Pott er County, to (1) acce pt and file a petition for

habeas corpus r

elator wi shes to file, ( 2) obey her oath of office, and (3) o bey certain specified decis ions of the United States Supreme Court and the law in general. He also seeks our dec laration that an application for habeas corpus is not subjec t to th e provisi ons of T EX . C IV . P RAC . & R EM . C ODE A NN . chapter 11 (Verno n Supp. 2004), concerning vexati ous litig ants. We dismiss for lack of j urisdicti on. Adistrict clerk is not one of t he of fici als a gains t whom we have jurisdic tion to issue writsof mandamus pursuant to T EX . G OV ’ T C ODE A NN . § 22.221(b) ( Vernon Supp. 2004). Nor does relator so urge. I nstead, relator claims that w

e have juri sdiction in this orig inal proceeding because respondent ’s refusal to acc ept his suit interferes with this court’s-2-

appellate jurisdic

tion. See id . § 22.221(a). He cites, i n part, In re Washington , 7 S.W.3d 181 (Tex.App.- -Houston [1 st Dist.] 1999, orig. pr oceeding). In Washington the relator filed a notice of appeal from a trial court proceedin g. The district clerk failed to process and forw ard the notice to the appellate court. The court of appeals noted that the filing of a notice of appeal invokes app ell ate jurisdi ction, and determined that it h ad jurisd iction to issue a writ o f man damus directin g the district clerk to perform the minis terial duty of forwarding the notice to t he appropriate a ppellate court
. Id . at 181-82. We agree wi th relator t hat we hav e jurisdic tion to issue a writ of mandamus to enforce our juris diction. See Gov’t. C ode § 22.221(a); In re Washington , 7 S.W.3d at 182
. But, such jurisdiction exists to enforce our actual, as opp osed to potential, jurisdic tion. See Shelvin v. Lyk

os , 741 S.W.2d 178, 181 (Tex.App.-- Houston [1 st Dist.] 19 87, orig. proceeding)
. Relator does not clai m the existen ce of, nor does he pr esent documents which he claim s evidence an appealable order , or a notice of appeal whic h has not been forw arded as occurred i n Washington . Our appellate jurisdiction as to the lawsuit relator all eges respondent

refuses to file is potent ial, as it is with any lawsuit which mi ght be filed and ev en tuallyappealed to this court. But, ou r jurisdiction over such a suit is not actual until an event occurs which ripens our potential jurisdiction into actual jurisdiction. An d, it is relator’s burden to proper ly req ues t and show ent itlement to the mandamus relief he-3-

requests. See generally John son v. Fourth District Court of Appeals , 700 S.W.2d 916, 917 (Tex. 1985) ( orig. pr

oceeding). He has not done so
. We dismiss the petition for w rit of mandamus for want of jurisdic tion.

Phil Johnson Chief Justice
#### In re MARX.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

April 12, 1912.)

In the matter of Samuel Marx. No opinion. Order affirmed. Order filed.
Ralph MULLINS, Jr., petitioner, v. Michael J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security.

No. 12-8715.

Supreme Court of the United States

July 22, 2013.

Petition for rehearing denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000701345
<NAME> US AIRWAYS GROUP, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                             397
<SECURITIES>                                       632
<RECEIVABLES>                                      468<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0<F1>
<INVENTORY>                                        244
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,179
<PP&E>                                           6,740
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,797
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   7,644
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,746
<BONDS>                                          1,904
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           101
<OTHER-SE>                                         (32)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     7,644
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 6,460
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    6,203
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 144
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    480
<INCOME-TAX>                                       202
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                278
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       278
<EPS-BASIC>                                       3.72
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     3.65
<FN>
<F1>Receivables are presented net of allowances.
</FN>


</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) CASE NO.: 1:14-CR-47-TLS 

)

MAURICE V. WATTS )

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

This matter is before the Court on the Findings and Recommendation of the United States

Magistrate Judge [ECF No. 12], filed on December 15, 2014. The Defendant has waived objection to

the Findings and Recommendation, and the Court, being duly advised, adopts the Findings and

Recommendation [ECF No. 12] in its entirety and accepts the recommended disposition. Subject to

this Court’s consideration of the Plea Agreement pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure

11(c), the plea of guilty to the offense charged in the single count of the Information is hereby

accepted, and the Defendant is adjudged guilty of such offense. 

The notice of sentencing and pre-sentence scheduling deadlines will be issued by separate

order.

SO ORDERED on December 30, 2014.

 s/ Theresa L. Springmann 

THERESA L. SPRINGMANN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
#### WOOD, Respondent, v. WHITEHEAD BROS. CO., Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

January 11, 1899.)

Action by Harvey Wood against the Whitehead Bros. Company.

No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs.
[No. 39400-2-I.

Division One.

October 20, 1997.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Andrew Lamont Hicks, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 96-1-00436-3, Janice Niemi, J., entered September 23, 1996. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Becker, J., concurred in by Baker, C.J., and Grosse, J.
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
 *Notice is hereby given*
                     that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC or Receiver) as Receiver for the institution listed below intends to terminate its receivership for said institution. Notice of Intent To Terminate Receivership
Fund
Receivership name
City
State
Date of
                             appointment  
                             of receiver10122
Georgian Bank
Atlanta
GA
09/25/2009
 The liquidation of the assets for the receivership has been completed. To the extent permitted by available funds and in accordance with law, the Receiver will be making a final dividend payment to proven creditors. Based upon the foregoing, the Receiver has determined that the continued existence of the receivership will serve no useful purpose. Consequently, notice is given that the receivership shall be terminated, to be effective no sooner than thirty days after the date of this notice. If any person wishes to comment concerning the termination of the receivership, such comment must be made in writing, identify the receivership to which the comment pertains, and sent within thirty days of the date of this notice to: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Division of Resolutions and Receiverships, Attention: Receivership Oversight Department 34.6, 1601 Bryan Street, Dallas, TX 75201. No comments concerning the termination of this receivership will be considered which are not sent within this timeframe. (Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1819) Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Dated at Washington, DC, on June 15, 2021. James P. Sheesley, Assistant Executive Secretary.


[FR Doc. 2021-13441 Filed 6-23-21; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Isac VELASQUEZ-PEREZ, a.k.a. Jaime Sifuentes-Villega, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-14505

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Aug. 4, 2011.

Yvette Rhodes, Robert E. O’Neill, David Paul Rhodes, Eduardo E. Toro-Font, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Tampa, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

*935Maria Guzman, Donna Lee Elm, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Tampa, FL, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before HULL, PRYOR and MARTIN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Maria Guzman, appointed counsel for Isac Velasquez-Perez, has filed a motion to withdraw on appeal, supported by a brief prepared pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Velasquez-Perez’s conviction and within-guideline sentence is AFFIRMED.
**EXHIBIT 99.1**
**CERTIFICATIONS**
I, Steven F. Udvar-Hazy, certify that:
1.     I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of International LeaseFinance Corporation;
2.     Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3.     Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4.     The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as definedin Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and wehave:
a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;
b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end ofthe period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and
5.     The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, tothe registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s boardof directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and
b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting.
Date: July 25, 2003
/S/ Steven F. Udvar-Hazy
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




In connection with the Quarterly Report of Wound Management Technologies, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Scott A. Haire, Chief Executive Officer and 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:





The 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 Company.













May 18, 2010





/S/    Scott A. Haire


Scott A. Haire,


Chairman of the Board,


Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer
[No. 21124-6-II.

Division Two.

September 26, 1997.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Larry D. Jones, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Clark County, No. 95-1-01855-6, James D. Ladley, J., entered September 3, 1996. *Reversed*by unpublished opinion per Morgan, J., concurred in by Houghton, C.J., and Bridge-water, J.
<TABLE> <S> <C>




<ARTICLE>  5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM
COMPAQ  COMPUTER  CORPORATION'S  CONSOLIDATED  BALANCE  SHEET  AND  CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENT  OF  INCOME  FOR  THE  PERIOD  ENDED  JUNE  30,  1999 AND IS QUALIFIED
IN  ITS  ENTIRETY  BY  REFERENCE  TO  SUCH  FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                            JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                       2,855
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,556
<ALLOWANCES>                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                  2,224
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            13,468
<PP&E>                                       3,018
<DEPRECIATION>                                   0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              22,425
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       10,376
<BONDS>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     7,520
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,005
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                22,425
<SALES>                                     15,600
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            18,839
<CGS>                                       12,338
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               14,576
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             4,079
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              42
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                142
<INCOME-TAX>                                    45
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             97
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                    97
<EPS-BASIC>                                    .07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .07


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000714560
<NAME> US AIRWAYS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                             384
<SECURITIES>                                       632
<RECEIVABLES>                                      571<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0<F1>
<INVENTORY>                                        211
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,138
<PP&E>                                           6,227
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,669
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   7,493
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,683
<BONDS>                                          1,892
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                          14
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     7,493
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 6,357
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    6,104
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 145
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    584
<INCOME-TAX>                                       233
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                351
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       351
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F2>
<FN>
<F1>Receivalbes are presented net of allowances.
<F2>EPS calculations are not relevant because US Airways, Inc. is a wholly-owned
subsidiary of US Airways Group, Inc.
</FN>


</TABLE>