alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Beltsville Human Nutrition Research Center: Beltsville, MD
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    About BHNRC
                        About Us
                                    Welcome to BHNRC
                                    FAQ
                                    History
                                    Directions to BHNRC
                                    Documents and Information
                    BHNRC Home PageSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Northeast Area Beltsville, Maryland (BHNRC) Beltsville Human Nutrition Research Center Docs







Businessheadline bar Partnering with BHNRC Please contact the Beltsville Area Office of Technology Transfer for more information if you are interested in developing cooperative interactions with BHNRC or other research programs at BARC.


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
#### ROSENBLATT et al., Appellants, v. PHILLIPS, Respondent, et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

April 12, 1912.)

Action by Sigmond H. Rosenblatt and others against James Phillips, Jr., and Walter G. Newman. (Appeal No. 2.) No opinion. Appeal discontinued on consent without costs. See, also, 147 App. Div. 912, 132 N. Y. Supp. 1144.
Exhibit 12.1

                                  CERTIFICATION
                                  -------------


I, Klaus Kjaerulff, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this Form 20-F of A/S Steamship Company Torm; and

2.   Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of
     a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
     statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
     were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
     report.




Date: March 25, 2005



/s/ Klaus Kjaerulff
-------------------
Chief Executive Officer
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 469 

To rescind amounts made available for water treatment improvements for 

the city of Kalispell, Montana, and make the amounts available for 

Federal deficit reduction. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 3, 2011 

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

to the Committee on Appropriations 

A BILL 

To rescind amounts made available for water treatment improvements for the city of Kalispell, Montana, and make 

the amounts available for Federal deficit reduction. 

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

3 SECTION 1. RECISSION OF AMOUNTS FOR WATER TREAT4 MENT IMPROVEMENTS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provi6 sion of law, the amounts provided to the city of Kalispell, 

7 Montana, for water treatment improvements, identified as 

8 project number 283 on page 1143 of the conference report 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 469 IS

1 to accompany H.R. 2673 of the 108th Congress (Con2 ference Report 108–401) are rescinded. 

3 (b) DEFICIT REDUCTION.—Amounts rescinded under 

4 subsection (a) shall be used to reduce the Federal deficit. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit
        32.2**
   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 Med-Emerg International Inc. (the
        "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2006 as filed
        with
        the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
        I,
        William Danis 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 to the best of my knowledge:
  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.
 
 Date:  November
        14, 2006




By:
              /s/
              William
                DanisName: William
                  Danis
                  Title:
                    Chief Financial Officer
[No. 21253-6-II.

Division Two.

October 10, 1997.]

#### Dickson-McFerran Properties, *Respondent,*v. George C. Mackie, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Pierce County, No. 93-2-07420-0, Waldo F. Stone, J., entered September 27, 1996. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Alexander, J. Pro Tern., concurred in by Houghton, C.J., and Morgan, J.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-4276

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JAMIRE DONYE WHITE, a/k/a TJ,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney,

District Judge. (3:11-cr-00375-FDW-3)

Submitted: October 25, 2013 Decided: November 1, 2013

Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Chiege O. Kalu Okwara, LAW OFFICE OF CHIEGE O. KALU OKWARA, 

Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Anne M. Tompkins, 

United States Attorney, William M. Miller, Assistant United 

States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Jamire Donye White pled guilty to taking by force, 

violence, and intimidation, a bank card, from a person and 

presence of another, who was assaulted during commission of the 

offense and using same card to withdraw currency and aiding and 

abetting the same, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) & (d)

(2006) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 (2006). He was sentenced to 151 months 

of imprisonment. On appeal, he raises two sentencing issues, 

whether: (1) the district court properly imposed enhancements 

under the Sentencing Guidelines and (2) his criminal history 

points were properly calculated. For the reasons that follow, 

we affirm.

We review sentences for procedural and substantive 

reasonableness under an abuse of discretion standard. Gall v. 

United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). Miscalculation of the 

Guidelines range is a significant procedural error. Id. White 

alleges that the district court erred by enhancing his sentence 

in various ways under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual

(“USSG”) (2012). We review a district court’s factual findings

for clear error and its legal conclusions de novo. United 

States v. Mehta, 594 F.3d 277, 281 (4th Cir. 2010).

White disputes the district court’s application of the 

Sentencing Guidelines enhancements finding that the property of 

a financial institution was taken, that a dangerous weapon was 
3

used to assault the victim, that the victim was physically 

restrained, and that White was an organizer, leader, manager, or 

supervisor of the offense. We find no clear error in the 

district court’s application of these Guidelines enhancements. 

In his second issue, White disputes some of his 

nineteen criminal history points. He concedes on appeal, 

however, that even if this court granted him relief regarding 

the disputed points, he would still have a criminal history 

category of VI, the highest category. Thus, any error by the 

district court was harmless and this claim also fails. 

Accordingly, we affirm White’s sentence. We dispense 

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 21-40524

Summary Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Brian McCuiston, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

No. 2:04-CR-676-2

Before Smith, Stewart, and Graves, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Brian McCuiston, federal prisoner #14835-064, was convicted of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute more than 500 grams of methamphetamine and was sentenced to 280 months in prison. In this appeal, he

challenges the denial of his motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 29, 2022

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 21-40524 Document: 00516259214 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/29/2022
No. 21-40524

2

§ 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). 

We review the denial of compassionate release for abuse of discretion. 

United States v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir. 2020). A district court 

abuses its discretion when its decision is based on a legal error or a clearly 

erroneous assessment of the evidence. Id. at 693–94.

A motion for compassionate release may be granted if, after considering the applicable 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, the district court finds, inter 

alia, that “extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant such a reduction”

and that a sentence “reduction is consistent with applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission.” 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). 

The district court denied relief based on its assessment of the § 3553(a) factors and for other reasons. McCuiston has failed to show that the court 

abused its discretion in determining that the § 3553(a) factors did not warrant 

compassionate release. See Chambliss, 948 F.3d at 693–94. 

The judgment is AFFIRMED.

Case: 21-40524 Document: 00516259214 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/29/2022
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The
Board of Directors of the General Partner
Pacific Energy Partners, L.P.:

We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No. 333-106804) on Form S-8 and (No. 333-107609 and
333-130645) on Form S-3 of Pacific Energy Partners, L.P. of our reports dated March 10, 2006, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Pacific Energy
Partners, L.P. as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated statements of income, partners' capital, comprehensive income, and cash flows for each of the years in the
three-year period ended December 31, 2005, management's assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, and the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, which reports appear in the December 31, 2005, annual report on Form 10-K of
Pacific Energy Partners, L.P.

/s/
KPMG LLP

Los
Angeles, California
March 10, 2006

---



QuickLinks
*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.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

For the Fifth Circuit

No. 97-31027

NOOR BEGUM KARIM, Wife of Fazal Karim; FAZAL KARIM,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

VERSUS

FINCH SHIPPING COMPANY, LTD., ET AL.,

Defendants

BARWIL AGENCIES (N.A.) LTD.; BPE INC;

FINCH SHIPPING COMPANY, LTD.

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

(95-CV-4169-L)

March 22, 1999

Before REYNALDO G. GARZA, JONES, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

We have carefully considered the briefs, the record excerpts

and relevant portions of the record itself. For the reasons stated

by the district court in its Memorandum and Order filed under date

of July 31, 1997, we AFFIRM the grant of summary judgment in favor
2

of Barwil Agencies (N.A.) Ltd. and BPE, Inc. on the cross-claims

filed by Finch Shipping Company, Ltd. as "in rem defendant" and

tendered for the benefits of the plaintiffs pursuant to Fed. R.

Civ. P. 14(c). 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion of appellee, Barwil

Agencies, Ltd., for award of damages and costs pursuant to Fed. R.

App. P. 38 is DENIED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion of appellee, Barwil

Agencies, Ltd., for sanctions against appellants is DENIED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion of appellee, Barwil

Agencies, Ltd. for award of attorneys’ fees is DENIED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that appellant’s pending motions are

DENIED as moot.
#### LUSK, Respondent, v. LEE et al., Appellants.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

October 16, 1907.)

Action by Fred Lusk against Fred Lee and another.

No opinion. Motion denied, without costs.
#### RENT-A-CENTER INC., Plaintiff-Appellant v. Danielle BARKER, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 08-30348.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Jan. 14, 2009.

I Harold Koretzky, Russell Lory Foster, Carver, Darden, Koretzky, Tessier, Finn, Blossman & Areaux, New Orleans, LA, Wilson Joseph Miguez, III, Robert F. Friedman, Littler Mendelson, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Christopher Leonard Zaunbrecher, Briney & Foret, Lafayette, LA, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

We VACATE the judgment of the district court and REMAND for reconsidera*854tion in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in *Hall Street Associates, L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc.,*— U.S.—, 128 S.Ct. 1396, 170 L.Ed.2d 254 (2008).

VACATED AND REMANDED.

*

 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.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Douglas Smith, Appellant.

Judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Clemente, J.), rendered October 27, 1982, affirmed *(People v Bangert,*107 AD2d 752; *People v Matta,*103 AD2d 756; *People v Kazepis,*101 AD2d 816). Titone, J. P., Mangano, Weinstein and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>

                                  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 annual report of West Bancorporation, Inc. on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Douglas R. Gulling, Executive
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of West Bancorporation, Inc.,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 conditions and results of operations of West
Bancorporation, Inc.

March 8, 2006

/s/ Douglas R. Gulling
-------------------------
Douglas R. Gulling
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
EX-10.1






Exhibit 10.1




2015 Short Term Incentive Plan Guidelines





	 	•	 	Each year the Compensation Committee of the Board (“the Committee”) will approve
the employees of Group 1 who are eligible for participation in the Short Term Incentive
Plan (“the Plan”) for the year.






	 	•	 	Incentive compensation levels of the Plan for each individual will be stated as a
percentage of the participating employee’s base compensation in effect when the Plan is
approved by the Committee.






	 	•	 	For Vice Presidents and above, incentive compensation levels of the Plan will be based
upon both financial-based and mission-based goals for the Plan year as established by the
Committee.






	 	 	 	– Up to 50% of the incentive award will be based on an established
financial goal (EPS target). The EPS target will equate to the Company’s adjusted
EPS as disclosed in its fourth quarter earnings release as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission. Any effects of stock buy backs will also be
excluded from the calculation.






	 	 	 	– Up to 50% of the incentive award will be based on mission-based goals
established at the beginning of each year. The mission-based bonus will only be
funded if the Company achieves a minimum EPS of $6.00.






	 	 	 	– The mission-based and financial-based portions of the bonus can be
awarded independently so that achievement of one is not predicated on the
achievement of the other.






	 	•	 	For Employees hired during a Plan year, the Committee will have complete discretion as
to the extent of participation in the Plan, if any, by the new hire.






	 	•	 	Employees who resign their positions with Group 1 will not be entitled to
participate in the Plan for the year in which the resignation occurs.






	 	•	 	Employees who resign their positions with Group 1 after the end of a Plan year,
but before the actual payment of the incentive compensation amounts will be entitled to
payment for the Plan year for which they were employed.






	 	•	 	Incentive Compensation earned for the Plan year will be paid after completion of the
Company’s audit and announcement of earnings for that year.






	 	•	 	In the event of a material restatement of the Company’s financial statement due to an
error, the Committee may, in its discretion, either make additional payment to or seek to
recover the cash amount by which the individual employee’s bonus is affected based on the
restated financial results.






	 	•	 	The Committee has sole authority to administer, modify or change the Plan, including but
not limited to, adjusting actual performance criteria for Plan purposes for extraordinary
or unusual items included in actual operating results, or when the company fails to meet
financial objectives.
### MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04

- 11

- 00 473

- CR

IN RE Jason MIEARS
Original Mandamus Proceeding 1

PER CURIAM
Sitting: Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice Rebecca Simmons, Justice Steven C. Hilbig, Justice

Delivered and Filed: August 3, 2011

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED
On July 6, 2011, relator Jason Miears filed a petition for writ of mandamus. The court
has considered relator’s petition and is of the opinion that relator is not entitled to the relief
sought. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED. S ee T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 52.8(a).

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause Nos. 2009

- CR

- 6566 , 2009

- CR

- 6567, 2009

- CR

- 6568, and 2009

- CR

- 6569 , styled State of Te xas v. Jason Miears , pending in the 379th Judicial District Court , Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Ron Rangel presiding.
* 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. 01-20549

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JESUS CARDONA-MERIDA,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-00-CR-912-1

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

April 11, 2002

Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jesus

Cardona-Merida has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a

brief as required by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). 

Cardona-Merida has received copies of counsel’s motion and brief

but has not filed a response. Our independent review of

counsel’s 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 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 424 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 424

 To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to preserve access to 
             ambulance services under the Medicare program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 1, 2011

 Mr. Schumer (for himself, Mr. Roberts, and Mr. Conrad) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                                Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to preserve access to 
             ambulance services under the Medicare program.

    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 ``Medicare Ambulance Access 
Preservation Act of 2011''.

SEC. 2. RETENTION OF ACCESS TO GROUND AMBULANCE SERVICES IN RURAL AND 
              URBAN AREAS UNDER THE MEDICARE PROGRAM.

    Section 1834(l)(13)(A) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
1395m(l)(13)(A)) is amended--
            (1) in the matter preceding clause (i), by striking 
        ``2012'' and inserting ``2018'';
            (2) in clause (i), by inserting ``, or 6 percent if such 
        service is furnished on or after January 1, 2012, and before 
        January 1, 2018'' after ``2012''; and
            (3) in clause (ii), by inserting ``, or 6 percent if such 
        service is furnished on or after January 1, 2012, and before 
        January 1, 2018'' after ``2012''.

SEC. 3. RETENTION OF ACCESS TO AMBULANCE SERVICES IN SUPER RURAL AREAS 
              UNDER THE MEDICARE PROGRAM.

    Section 1834(l)(12)(A) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
1395m(l)(12)(A)) is amended by striking ``2012'' and inserting 
``2018''.
                                 <all>
```