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

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1688 

To amend the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014 

to designate 20 graduate medical education residency positions specifically for the study of optometry. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 26, 2015 

Mr. DENHAM introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability 

Act of 2014 to designate 20 graduate medical education 

residency positions specifically for the study of optometry. 

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

3 SECTION 1. GRADUATE MEDICAL EDUCATION RESIDENCY 

4 POSITIONS IN OPTOMETRY. 

5 Section 301(b)(2)(A) of the Veterans Access, Choice, 

6 and Accountability Act of 2014 (Public Law 113–146; 38 

7 U.S.C. 7302 note) is amended by striking ‘‘positions.’’ and 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1688 IH

1 inserting ‘‘positions, including up to 20 positions specifi2 cally designated for residencies in optometry.’’. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jason Francisco PORTER, aka Jason F. Porter, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-35427.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*745Submitted April 16, 2007 *.

Filed April 19, 2007.

Pamala R. Holsinger, USPO-Offiee of the U.S. Attorney, Mark O. Hatfield, Portland, OR, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Jindrich Henry Langer, Attorney at Law, Salem, OR, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: O’SCANNLAIN, CLIFTON, and BEA, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Federal prisoner Jason Francisco Porter appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253. We review *de novo, United States v. Rodrigues,*347 F.3d 818, 823 (9th Cir.2003), and we affirm.

Porter contends that the Supreme Court’s decision making the United States Sentencing Guidelines “effectively advisory,” *see United States v. Booker,*543 U.S. 220, 245, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), applies retroactively to his case, which became final on direct review in 2003. He therefore asks us to vacate his sentence and remand his case to the district court for resentencing. Porter’s contention is foreclosed. *See United States v. Cruz,*423 F.3d 1119, 1121 (9th Cir.2005) (per curiam) (holding that *Booker*does not apply retroactively).

We decline to address the cruel and unusual punishment and equal protection claims that Porter raises for the first time on appeal. *See Snow-Erlin v. United States,*470 F.3d 804, 808 n. 1 (9th Cir.2006).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
WILBORN LAW OFFICE, P.C. 

TIM WILBORN, Attorney at Law - OSB # 944644 

tim@wilbornlaw.com 

P.O. Box 370578 

Las Vegas, NV 89137 

Voice: (702) 240-0184 

Fax: (503) 926-9133 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF OREGON 

ROBIN ROSE LEEDY, Case No. 6:1 -cv-00062-MC 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

COMMISSIONER of Social Security, 

Defendant. 

ORDER 

Attorney fees in the amount of $10,000.00 are hereby awarded to Plaintiff pursuant to the 

Equal Access To Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). Subject to any offset allowed under the Treasury 

Offset Program, payment of this award shall be made via check sent to Tim Wilborn's address: P.O. 

Box 3 70578, Las Vegas, NV 8913 7. In accordance with the fee assignment which Plaintiff has 

signed, payment shall be made in Tim Wilborn's name if no debt subject to offset exists. 

DA TED this 2-l day of ~ f rJ J '2017. 

Submitted on April 20, 2017 by: 

s/ Tim Wilborn 

TIM WILBORN, OSB # 944644 

(702) 240-0184 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

ORDER - Page 1 

\_ LUnited States District Court Judge 

6
# C_2006239EN.01001801.xml

| 4.10.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 239/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.10.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 239/18

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 68/2001 of 12 January 2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to training aid, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 363/2004 of 25 February 2004

(2006/C 239/07)

(Text with EEA relevance)

| Aid No | XT 1/06 |
| --- | --- |
| Member State | Estonia |
| Region | Estonia |
| Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving individual aid | National Development Plan Action 1.3 RAK meede 1.3 ‘Inclusive Labour Market’ |
| Legal basis | Sotsiaalministri 4. aprilli 2006.a määrus nr 35 “Meetme 1.3 “Võrdsed võimalused tööturul”, välja arvatud riigi tööturuasutuste projektidele antava toetuse, tingimused ja toetuse kasutamise seire eeskiri” (RTL, 11.04.2006, 31, 553) |
| Annual expenditure planned or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company | Aid scheme | Annual overall amount | Up to EUR 0,19 million (2006) |
| Loans guaranteed | |
| Individual aid | Overall aid amount | |
| Loans guaranteed | |
| Maximum aid intensity | In conformity with Article 4(2)-(7) of the Regulation | Yes | |
| Date of implementation | 14 April 2006 |
| Duration of scheme or individual aid award | Until 31 December 2006 |
| Objective of aid | General training | Yes |
| Specific training | Yes |
| Economic sectors concerned | Limited to specific sectors | |
| Agriculture | Yes |
| Fisheries and aquaculture | Yes |
| Coalmining | No |
| All manufacturing | Yes |
| All services | Yes |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Tööturuamet |
| Gonsiori 29 |
| EE-15156 Tallinn |

Aid No

XT 1/06

Member State

Estonia

Region

Estonia

Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving individual aid

National Development Plan Action 1.3 RAK meede 1.3 ‘Inclusive Labour Market’

Legal basis

Sotsiaalministri 4. aprilli 2006.a määrus nr 35 “Meetme 1.3 “Võrdsed võimalused tööturul”, välja arvatud riigi tööturuasutuste projektidele antava toetuse, tingimused ja toetuse kasutamise seire eeskiri” (RTL, 11.04.2006, 31, 553)

Annual expenditure planned or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company

Aid scheme

Annual overall amount

Up to EUR 0,19 million (2006)

Loans guaranteed

Individual aid

Overall aid amount

Loans guaranteed

Maximum aid intensity

In conformity with Article 4(2)-(7) of the Regulation

Yes

Date of implementation

14 April 2006

Duration of scheme or individual aid award

Until 31 December 2006

Objective of aid

General training

Yes

Specific training

Yes

Economic sectors concerned

Limited to specific sectors

Agriculture

Yes

Fisheries and aquaculture

Yes

Coalmining

No

All manufacturing

Yes

All services

Yes

Name and address of the granting authority

Tööturuamet

Gonsiori 29

EE-15156 Tallinn

Large individual aid grants

In conformity with Article 5 of the Regulation

Yes

---
Document Headings

                    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.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis Panel, Research Infrastructure for Interdisciplinary Aging Studies                    

*Date:*                         October 26, 2021.                    

*Time:*                         3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Video Meeting).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Isis S. Mikhail, MD, MPH, DrPH, Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch,  National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Gateway Building 2C212, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 402-7704,                         *mikhaili@mail.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, Aging Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: August 31, 2021.

Miguelina Perez,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2021-19229 Filed 9-3-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
#### Luis SILVA-TORRES; Maria Elena Gonzalez De Silva, Petitioners, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 06-72272.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 16, 2007.*

Filed April 20, 2007.

Jeremy M. Clason, Esq., Camille K. Cook, Esq., Fresno, CA, Petitioners.

Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Linda S. Wendtland, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Robert N. Maride, Esq., Office of Immigration Litigation Civil Division, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: O’SCANNLAIN, CLIFTON and BEA, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Luis Silva-Torres and Maria Elena Gonzalez De Silva, husband and wife, seek review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals upholding an immigration judge’s order denying their applications for cancellation of removal. We dismiss in the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the discretionary determination that petitioners failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a qualifying relative. *See Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft,*327 F.3d 887, 892 (9th Cir.2003).

Petitioners’ contention that their removal would violate due process by infringing on their right to family unity is unavailing. *See Urbano de Malaluan v. INS,*577 F.2d 589, 594 (9th Cir.1978); *see also Mamanee v. INS,*566 F.2d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir.1977).

*753PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
JOHN ERIC SMITH, 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 

MEDFORD DIVISION 

Civ. No. 1:16-cv-00690-CL 

Plaintiff, 

JUDGMENT 

V. 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Defendant. 

CLARKE, Magistrate Judge. 

Judgment is entered in accordance with the Court's Findings of Fact and Conclusions of 

Law (#87) and its Order on Post-Trial Damages (#106). Plaintiff is entitled to $1,847,009.06 in 

past medical expenses, $3,800,000.00 in future medical expenses, and $7,000,000.00 in noneconomic damages. Plaintiff may submit a bill of costs to the Court for approval. 

United States Magistrate Judge 

Page 1 - illDGMENT 

Case 1:16-cv-00690-CL Document 107 Filed 11/09/18 Page 1 of 1
##### 



EXHIBIT 99.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Robert C. Bateman, Chief Financial Officer of Applied
Microsystems Corporation (the Registrant), do hereby certify in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| |  |  | (1) the Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q of the Registrant, to which this certification is
attached as an exhibit (the Report), fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and
| |  |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| |  |  | (2) the information contained
in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.                                                                                     

Dated: May 14, 2003



| | /s/ Robert C.
Bateman                   
| | ----------------------------------------
| |                                         
| | Robert C.
BatemanChief Financial Officer
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, UlrichGottschling, certify that:

1.                I have reviewedthis annual report on Form 10-K of SRS Labs, Inc.;

2.                Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.                Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

4.                The registrant’sother certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a)                Designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this annual report is being prepared;

c)                Evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

d)               Disclosed in thisreport any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter ended December 31,2006 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.                The registrant’sother certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):

a)                All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrols over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information;

b)               Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls over financialreporting.
| Dated: March 22, 2007 | By:      | /s/ ULRICH GOTTSCHLING                                    |
|----------------------------|----------|-----------------------------------------------------------|
|                       |     | Ulrich  Gottschling                                       |
|                       | * * | *Chief  Financial Officer  (Principal Financial Officer)* |

 

----
# C_2009050EN.01000501.xml

| 3.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 50/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 50/5

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5386 — Penta/Okna Rabien)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2009/C 50/02)

On 24 February 2009, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition web site (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition web site (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32009M5386. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu). |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32009M5386. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

---
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-12-00251-CR

JOSE JUAN VARELA

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

On Appeal from the

430th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas

Trial Cause No. CR-3003-10-J

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be AFFIRMED. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

January 9, 2014
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               Dec-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                  Jan-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                    Dec-31-1997
<CASH>                          1,453
<SECURITIES>                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                   2,864
<ALLOWANCES>                    274
<INVENTORY>                     642
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                5,125
<PP&E>                          2,249
<DEPRECIATION>                  126
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  19,967
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           2,103
<BONDS>                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0
<PREFERRED>                     0
<COMMON>                        36
<OTHER-SE>                      11,663
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    19,967
<SALES>                         4,532
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                4,532
<CGS>                           3,097
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   3,097
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                1,479
<LOSS-PROVISION>                (35)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 (35)
<INCOME-TAX>                    (38)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             (73)
<DISCONTINUED>                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0
<CHANGES>                       0
<NET-INCOME>                    (73)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                   0
<EPS-DILUTED>                   0
        



</TABLE>
BILLY J. WILLIAMS, OSB #901366 

United States Attorney 

District of Oregon 

ETHAN D. KNIGHT, OSB #99298 

GEOFFREY A. BARROW 

Assistant United States Attorneys 

ethan.knight@usdoj.gov 

geoffrey. barrow@usdoj.gov 

1000 SW Third Ave., Suite 600 

Portland, OR 97204-2902 

Telephone: (503) 727-1000 

Attorneys for United States of America 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF OREGON 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

v. 

GEOFFREY STANEK, and 

TRAVIS COX, 

Defendants. 

3: 16-CR-00064-JO 

MOTION TO UNSEAL 

INDICTMENT AS 

TO DEFENDANTS 

STANEK AND COX 

The United States of America, by Billy J. Williams, United States Attorney for the 

District of Oregon, and Ethan D. Knight and Geoffrey A. Barrow, Assistant United States 

Attorneys, moves the Court for an order unsealing the Indictment in this matter as to Defendants 

Geoffrey Stanek and Travis Cox. 

Dated this 12th day of February 2016. 

Respectfully submitted, 

BILLY J. WILLIAMS 

E HAND. KNIGHT, 0 98 

GEOFFREY A. BARROW 

Assistant United States Attorneys 

Case 3:16-cr-00064-JO Document 31 Filed 02/12/16 Page 1 of 1
#### Raia Industries, Inc., Appellant, v Christine A. Young, Doing Business as Empire Paving Co., Respondent.

The proponent of a motion for summary judgment is required to make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, offering sufficient evidence to eliminate any material issues of fact from the case. The failure to make such a showing requires the denial of the motion, regardless of the insufficiency of the opposing papers *(see, Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Center,*64 NY2d 851; *Royal v Brooklyn Union Gas Co.,*122 AD2d 132). Here, the plaintiff has failed to make the necessary prima facie showing. Thompson, J. P., Weinstein, Niehoff and Spatt, JJ., concur.
|  1. | I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Altair Nanotechnologies Inc.; and                                                                                                                                                                                                                              |   |
|----------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|     |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              |   |
|  2. | Based on my knowledge, this annual 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: April 30, 2013   | By:    | /s/ Alexander Lee  |   |
|----------------------------------|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|                             |   |                    |   |
|                             |   | Alexander Lee,          |   |
|                             |   |                    |   |
|                             |   | Chief Executive Officer |   |
|                             |   |                    |   |
#### GREEN, Respondent, v. HAUSSEN, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

July 30, 1896.)

Action by James L. Green against Waldemar Haussen.

No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.