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

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2071 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 458
105th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2071

                          [Report No. 105-241]

  To extend a quarterly financial report program administered by the 
                         Secretary of Commerce.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 13, 1998

  Mr. Thompson  (for himself and Mr. Glenn) introduced the following 
      bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                          Governmental Affairs

                              July 8, 1998

              Reported by Mr. Thompson, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To extend a quarterly financial report program administered by the 
                         Secretary of Commerce.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT PROGRAM.

    Section 4(b) of the Act entitled ``An Act to amend title 13, United 
States Code, to transfer responsibility for the quarterly financial 
report from the Federal Trade Commission to the Secretary of Commerce, 
and for other purposes'', approved January 12, 1983 (Public Law 97-454; 
13 U.S.C. 91 note), is amended by striking ``September 30, 1998'' and 
inserting ``September 30, 2005''.
                                     

                                                       Calendar No. 458

105th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                S. 2071

                          [Report No. 105-241]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

  To extend a quarterly financial report program administered by the 
                         Secretary of Commerce.

_______________________________________________________________________

                              July 8, 1998

                       Reported without amendment
```
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-4257

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,

v. MICHAEL LEWIS WHITE, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Elizabeth City. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:08-cr-00224-BO-1)

Submitted: January 5, 2010 Decided: January 25, 2010

Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Stephen C. Gordon, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. George E. B. Holding, United States Attorney, Anne M. Hayes, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.PER CURIAM: Michael Lewis White pleaded guilty to possession of a firearm after having previously been convicted of a crime punishable by a term of imprisonment exceeding one year, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2006). White subsequently moved to withdraw his guilty plea and the district court denied his motion. The court sentenced White to 120 months of imprisonment and White now appeals. Finding no error, we affirm. On appeal, White argues that the district court erred in denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. We review a district court’s denial of a motion to withdraw a guilty plea for abuse of discretion. United States v. Dyess , 478 F.3d 224, 237 (4th Cir. 2007) (citation omitted). A defendant seeking to withdraw his guilty plea bears the burden of demonstrating that withdrawal should be granted. Id. White argues that he was legally innocent of violating § 922(g)(1) because his prior convictions for possession with intent to distribute cocaine, possession with intent to distribute marijuana, possession of cocaine, and possession of stolen property were not punishable by a term of imprisonment exceeding one year. While White’s argument is concededly foreclosed by United States v. Harp , 406 F.3d 242, 246-47 (4th Cir. 2005), he argues that the subsequent decisions in United

23 States v. Rodriguez , 553 U.S. 337 (2008), and United States v. Pruitt , 545 F.3d 416 (6th Cir. 2008), have undermined this court’s holding in Harp . We have thoroughly reviewed the record and the relevant legal authorities and conclude that our holding in Harp is consistent with the Supreme Court’s decision in Rodriguez . Further, to the extent Pruitt may be inconsistent with Harp , decisions by our sister circuits are simply not binding upon this court. We therefore affirm the judgment of the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
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
 Pest Management Research: Sidney, MT
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    NPARL
                        Northern Plains Agricultural Research Laboratory
                                    Agricultural Systems Research Unit
                                    Grasshoppers: Their Biology, Identification and ManagementSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Plains Area Sidney, Montana Northern Plains Agricultural Research Laboratory Pest Management Research PMRU Docs Grasshoppers: Their Biology, Identification and Management: Outbreak and Survey Info Forecast Maps





- NPARL Home
- PMRU Home
- ASRU Home
- Site Highlights
- Outbreak and Survey Info
- ID Tools | Apps
- Grasshopper Management
- IPM Handbook
- USDA Research | Contact Info

Outbreak Info: Grasshopper Forecast 2019headline bar /ARSUserFiles/30320505/grasshopper/Extras/images/Maps/map19.jpg < Previous Map      Back to Outbreak Info >      Next Map> The data summarized in this map were furnished by the respective state, county, university and federal agencies using a variety of survey methods and analytical techniques.  Due to funding considerations, states may not have continuous survey coverage. This map was prepared by USDA-APHIS-PPQ in cooperation with CPHST.


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
# C_2006271EN.01000801.xml

| 8.11.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 271/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.11.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 271/8

---

Commission opinion of 7 November 2006 concerning the plan for the disposal of radioactive waste from the Georges Besse II facility on the Tricastin site in France, in accordance with Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty

(2006/C 271/03)

(Only the French text is authentic)

On 6 March 2006, the European Commission received from the Government of France, in accordance with Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty, General Data relating to the plan for the disposal of radioactive waste from the Georges Besse II facility.

On the basis of the General Data, and following consultation with the Group of Experts, the Commission has drawn up the following opinion:

| 1. | The distance between the plant and the nearest point on the territory of another Member State, in this case Italy, is approximately 175 km. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The distance between the plant and the nearest point on the territory of another Member State, in this case Italy, is approximately 175 km.

| 2. | During normal operation, discharges of liquid and gaseous effluents will not cause an exposure of the population in other Member States that is significant from the point of view of health. |
| --- | --- |

2.

During normal operation, discharges of liquid and gaseous effluents will not cause an exposure of the population in other Member States that is significant from the point of view of health.

| 3. | Solid radioactive waste from the production operations will be stored or disposed of at approved sites in France. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Solid radioactive waste from the production operations will be stored or disposed of at approved sites in France.

| 4. | In the event of unplanned releases of radioactive effluents resulting from an accident of the type and magnitude considered in the General Data, the doses likely to be received by the population in other Member States would not be significant from the point of view of health. |
| --- | --- |

4.

In the event of unplanned releases of radioactive effluents resulting from an accident of the type and magnitude considered in the General Data, the doses likely to be received by the population in other Member States would not be significant from the point of view of health.

In conclusion, the Commission is of the opinion that the implementation of the plan for the disposal of radioactive waste in whatever form from the operation of the Georges Besse II facility, at the Tricastin site in France, both in normal operation and in the event of an accident of the type and magnitude considered in the General Data, is not liable to result in radioactive contamination, significant from the point of view of health, of the water, soil or airspace of another Member State.

---
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
 Athens, Georgia
 close




            Search small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home People & Locations







Jeffrey  Martin
                        Location Support Staff

                        




                        
                        Facility Management Specialist
                        Phone: (706) 546-3721
                        
                        
                        Fax: (Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


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
[No. 9694.

Department One.

November 14, 1912.]

#### John Kanton *et al., Appellants,*v. Albert Kelly, *Respondent.**1*

Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for King county, Albertson, J., entered March 28, 1911, upon granting a nonsuit, after a trial before the court and a jury, in an action for wrongful death.

Affirmed.

*John E. Humphries*and *Geo. B. Cole,*for appellants.

*Farrell, Kane & Stratton,*for respondent.

1

Reported in 127 Pac. 568.

On Petition fob Rehearing.

Per Curiam.

We are requested by counsel for appellant to modify the language of our opinion upon rehearing filed in this case, found in- 65 Wash. 622, 121 Pac. 833, which seems to criticise counsel for language used in their petition for rehearing. It is but fair to counsel for appellant to state that the language of the court complained of was used in disposing of a petition for rehearing which has been prepared but never filed or become a part of the record in this case. Copies of this petition had been sent by mail to the several judges, as is often done by counsel at the time of filing the original in the case. Thereafter another petition was filed, which became the formal petition for rehearing. This petition contained no language in the least discourteous to the court, and was evidently filed to avoid any seeming discourtesy which may have been contained in the former petition. In disposing of the questions presented upon rehearing, the court assumed that the first petition, which was in the hand of each judge, had been filed by counsel, as the practice of sending copies of such petitions to the several judges is quite uniform. We are satisfied that counsel had no intention of committing any act of discourtesy, and deem it but just to them that we now so state, in view of the fact that our language, seeming to so indicate, appears in the published report of the case.

A reexamination of the questions presented induces us to adhere to our former opinion upon the merits of the ease. The petition for rehearing is therefore denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>

          This schedule  contains summary financial  information  extracted from
          Pen  Interconnect,  Inc.  June 30, 2000  financial  statements and is
          qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.

</LEGEND>

<CIK>                         0001000266
<NAME>                        Pen Interconnect, Inc.
<CURRENCY>                    US


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS

<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>               1.00

<CASH>                                        2,752
<SECURITIES>                                  118,506
<RECEIVABLES>                                 0
<ALLOWANCES>                                  0
<INVENTORY>                                   0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              154,812
<PP&E>                                        1,028
<DEPRECIATION>                                129
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                155,712
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         3,770,795
<BONDS>                                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0
<PREFERRED>                                   0
<COMMON>                                      260,591
<OTHER-SE>                                    (3,875,674)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  155,712
<SALES>                                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              0
<CGS>                                         0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              1,348,013
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            348,072
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (3,045,470)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  900
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (1,348,013)
<DISCONTINUED>                                (1,349,385)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               0
<CHANGES>                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (3,046,370)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (.19)



</TABLE>
1 – OPINION AND ORDER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

EUGENE DIVISION

DEBRA KAY EMERSON, 

No. 6:15-cv-01789-YY

Plaintiff, 

OPINION AND ORDER

v. 

COMMISSIONER, SOCIAL 

SECURITY ADMINSTRATION, 

 Defendant.

MOSMAN, J., 

On March 2, 2017, Magistrate Judge Youlee Yim You issued her Findings and 

Recommendation (“F&R”) [26], recommending that the Commissioner’s decision pursuant to 42 

U.S.C. § 405(g) and § 1383(c)(3) should be AFFIRMED. No objections to the F&R were filed.

DISCUSSION

The magistrate judge makes only recommendations to the court, to which any party may 

file written objections. The court is not bound by the recommendations of the magistrate judge, 

but retains responsibility for making the final determination. The court is generally required to 

make a de novo determination regarding those portions of the report or specified findings or 

recommendation as to which an objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). However, the court 

is not required to review, de novo or under any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of 

Case 6:15-cv-01789-YY Document 28 Filed 03/29/17 Page 1 of 2
2 – OPINION AND ORDER

the magistrate judge as to those portions of the F&R to which no objections are addressed. See 

Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 

(9th Cir. 2003). While the level of scrutiny under which I am required to review the F&R 

depends on whether or not objections have been filed, in either case, I am free to accept, reject, 

or modify any part of the F&R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). 

Upon review, I agree with Judge You’s recommendation and ADOPT the F&R [26] as 

my own opinion. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 29th day of March, 2017. 

/s/ Michael W. Mosman_________ 

MICHAEL W. MOSMAN

Chief United States District Judge

Case 6:15-cv-01789-YY Document 28 Filed 03/29/17 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>        5
<LEGEND>
This Schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
financial statements contained in the body of the accompanying Form 10-Q and
is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>      1,000
       

<CAPTION>



<S>                            <C>
<CIK>                          0001000458
<NAME>                         CRAIN INDUSTRIES, INC.
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                   SEP-30-1996

<CASH>                           1,822
<SECURITIES>                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                   46,209
<ALLOWANCES>                     4,042
<INVENTORY>                     29,147
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                75,556
<PP&E>                          52,632
<DEPRECIATION>                   7,286
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                 182,825
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           42,239
<BONDS>                        110,177
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                0
<PREFERRED>                          0
<COMMON>                             0
<OTHER-SE>                      25,456
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>   182,825
<SALES>                        226,191
<TOTAL-REVENUES>               226,191
<CGS>                          180,111
<TOTAL-COSTS>                  186,678
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                   575
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              12,119
<INCOME-PRETAX>                  2,212
<INCOME-TAX>                       938
<INCOME-CONTINUING>              1,274
<DISCONTINUED>                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                      0
<CHANGES>                            0
<NET-INCOME>                     1,274
<EPS-PRIMARY>                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                        0

        

</TABLE>
1 –ORDER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

JEREMY FELDMILLER,

Case No. 6:15-cv-02391-JR

Plaintiff, ORDER

v. 

NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting

Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

_____________________________

MCSHANE, Judge:

Magistrate Judge Jolie A. Russo has filed a Findings and Recommendation, ECF No. 23, 

and the matter is now before me. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). The 

Commissioner filed objections to the Findings and Recommendation. Accordingly, I have 

reviewed this case de novo. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. 

Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981). I find no error and adopt the 

Findings and Recommendations. 
2 –ORDER

Magistrate Judge Russo’s Findings and Recommendation, ECF No. 23, is ADOPTED in 

full. The Commissioner’s decision is REVERSED and REMANDED for payment of benefits.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 19th day of September, 2017.

 

/s/ Michael McShane

Michael McShane

United States District Judge
Glen Canyon Dam Technical Work Group Meeting 

January 19 & 21, 2000 

List of Attachments 

No. Title Author / Presenter

1 Attendance Sheets 

2a Three Hydrologic Scenarios (graph) Tom Ryan 

2b 8.23 MAF release year Tom Ryan 

3 LSSF possible flows Tom Ryan 

4 Native Fish Groups: An Approach to Removal of Jeopardy from 

Native Fishes in the Grand Canyon 

Dennis Kubly 

5 The Influence of Dam Discharge on Water Temperature Barbara Ralston 

6 AMWG Strategic Plan / Goals Group Rick Johnson 

7 Report of Kanab Ambersnail Review Panel on Taxonomic, 

Ecological, and Translocation Issues Concerning the Conservation 

of Oxyloma Snails in Arizona and Utah 

Jeff Sorensen 

8 Meeting Effectiveness Agenda Mary Orton 

9 Robert’s Rules of Order - Conducting Business through Motions Mary Orton 

10 Robert’s Rules of Order - Brief Summary of Basic Procedures Mary Orton
EXHIBIT
      32.1





Certification
      of Periodic Financial Report


Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350





Each
      of
      the undersigned officers of Tech/Ops Sevcon, Inc. (the “Company”) certifies,
      under the standards set forth in and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C.
      Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
      of
      2002, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended
      September 30, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in that
      Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
      and
      results of operations of the Company.





Dated:
      December 14, 2007


/s/
      Matthew Boyle


Matthew
      Boyle


Chief
      Executive Officer





Dated:
      December 14, 2007


/s/
      Paul A. McPartlin


Paul
      A.
      McPartlin


Chief
      Financial Officer