alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           2,129
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   70,958
<ALLOWANCES>                                    12,461
<INVENTORY>                                      3,109
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                72,605
<PP&E>                                          30,372
<DEPRECIATION>                                  13,222
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 140,203
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           25,257
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        44,119
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   140,203
<SALES>                                         92,788
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                92,788
<CGS>                                           43,587
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   85,427
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                28,396<F1>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,634
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (24,669)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (2,841)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (21,828)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (21,828)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.38)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.38)
<FN>
<F1>Other expenses includes pretax accounting charges during the three months
ended December 31, 1997 of $28.4 million which was comprised of a writedown of
goodwill of $23.5 million, restructuring costs of $3.7 million and the writeoff
of deferred costs aggregating $1.2 million related to a terminated acquisition.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 23.1

               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We  have  issued  our  report  dated  March 21, 2002, accompanying the financial
statements  included  in the Annual Report of Amplidyne, Inc. on Form 10K-SB for
the  year  ended  December  31,  2001. We hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference  of  said reports in the Registration Statements of Amplidyne, Inc. on
Forms  S-3 (File No. 333-92919, as amended by File No. 333-11015, effective date
January  18, 2000, and File No. 333-96361, effective date July 3, 2000) and Form
S-8  (File  No.  333-92915,  effective  date  December  16,  1999).

KAHN  BOYD  LEVYCHIN,  LLP

New  York,  New  York
March  21,  2002
#### James Lee BOULER, Specialist Six, U. S. Army, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES, Respondent.

Miscellaneous Docket No. 75-66.

U. S. Court of Military Appeals.

Feb. 27, 1976.

*Captain John R. Osgood*argued the cause for Petitioner. With him on the brief were *Colonel Alton H. Harvey*and *Lieutenant Colonel James Kucera.*

*Captain Gary F. Thorne*argued the cause for Respondent. With him on the brief were *Lieutenant Colonel Donald W. Hansen*and *Major John T. Sherwood, Jr.*

OPINION OF THE COURT

COOK, Judge:

This petitioner was convicted on July 14, 1975, of three marihuana offenses for which he was sentenced to a bad-conduct discharge, 18 months’ confinement, and reduction in grade. Aware that he was disqualified to act on the results of trial due to a grant of immunity, the convening authority forwarded the record to an equivalent authority at Ft. Carson, Colorado, for reviewing action, which was accomplished on October 20, 1975. During the elapsed period of 98 days, the petitioner was continuously in confinement and, thus, after the 90th day there arose “a presumption of a denial of speedy disposition of the case” which placed upon the Government “ ‘a heavy burden . to show diligence.’ ” 1

*300On the basis of this time period, the petitioner filed a petition for extraordinary relief. Although afforded the opportunity to rebut the presumption, the Government presented no evidence to show the requisite diligence. The presumption, therefore, has not been overcome. Accordingly, the findings and sentence are set aside, and we direct that the charges be dismissed.

Senior Judge FERGUSON concurs.

1

. *Dunlap v. Convening Authority,*23 U.S.C.M.A. 135, 138, 48 C.M.R. 751, 754 (1974); *see United States v. Slama,*23 U.S.C.M.A. 560, 50 C.M.R. 779, 1 M.J. 167 (1975).

FLETCHER, Chief Judge

(concurring):

I concur in the opinion of the Court with the following additional observations. I view the 90-day *Dunlap*standard as the time frame within which the normal processing of a convening authority’s action must be accomplished. Upon proper showing, the disqualification of a convening authority which necessitates additional processing time *could*constitute an “extraordinary circumstance” sufficient to overcome the presumed denial of speedy disposition. *See, e. g., United States v. Beach,*23 U.S.C.M.A. 480, 50 C.M.R. 560, 1 M.J. 118 (1975); *United States v. Johnson,*23 U.S.C.M.A. 91, 93, 48 C.M.R. 599, 601 (1974); *United States*v. *Marshall,*22 U.S.C.M.A. 431, 47 C.M.R. 409 (1973). However, the present record evidences nothing more than the convening authority’s disqualification coupled with the mere transfer of the record of trial to another jurisdiction. There has been no showing that this process was responsible for the substantial delay in taking action on the appellant’s case. Thus, I join the majority in concluding that the presumed *Dunlap*violation has not been rebutted and hence that the charges must be dismissed.
FY 2020 Proposed Budget

GCDAMP Technical Working Group

June 11, 2019

Lee Traynham

Bureau of Reclamation

Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program 
Where are we in the Triennial Work 

Plan Process?

FY 2017

HEAVY LIFTING!

Develop and Recommend 

the FY18-20 TWP

FY 2018

EASY TIMES!

Review, Revise, and 

Recommend FY19 Budget

FY 2019

SOME WORK TO DO!

Do We Need to 

Change Anything?

FY 2020

HEAVY LIFTING!

Develop and Recommend 

the FY21-23 TWP
FY 2020 Budget Planning

• Start with AMWG 

recommended 

FY 18-20 Budget and 

Work Plan

• Determine whether any 

adjustments need to be 

made for FY20 (e.g., 

changes in science, 

adjustments in 

implementation)
FY2020 GCDAMP Funding 

• In FY19, GCDAMP was funded by appropriated dollars 

rather than power revenues

o Per WAPA, OMB Directive remains in place until is rescinded or 

replaced. 

• In FY20, Reclamation requested over-target 

appropriated funding 
The Federal Budget Calendar

Budget information is not public until President's 

budget is released

1. FY2020 Bureau of Reclamation Budget Justifications (pages 93-95) –

2. FY2020 Energy and Water Appropriations Draft Bill (House) –

URL

URL
Differences between Appropriated 

Dollars and Power Revenues

Appropriated Dollars

• Requested 3 yrs in 

advance - next request will 

be for FY22

• Do not include CPI

• Do not carry over from year 

to year

• Must be obligated by the 

end of the FY

• Can be impacted by 

Continuing Resolutions

Power Revenues

• Included CPI 

• Can be carried over from year 

to year

– Native Fish Conservation 

Contingency Fund

– NHPA Section 106 

Contingency Fund

• Usually not impacted by 

Continuing Resolutions - but 

may get monthly increments 

instead of lump sum
FY20 Proposed Budget - Totals
A. AMWG and B. TWG
C. Program Administration
D. Cultural Resources
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Douglas E. Kampfer, Appellant.

Submitted February 5, 2007;

decided February 15, 2007

Appeal dismissed, without costs, by the Court of Appeals, sua sponte, upon the ground that it does not lie *(see*NY Const, art VI, § 3 [b]; CPLR 5601; CPL 450.90).

Judge Jones taking no part.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2018 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2018

To ensure that the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority complies 
                        with auditing standards.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 23, 2015

  Ms. Norton introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To ensure that the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority complies 
                        with auditing standards.

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

SECTION 1. AUDITING STANDARDS REQUIREMENT.

    No Federal funds may be made available to the Metropolitan 
Washington Airports Authority unless the Secretary of the Department of 
Transportation certifies that the Metropolitan Washington Airports 
Authority is complying with appropriate auditing standards.
                                 <all>
```
[Letterhead of KPMG Peat Marwick LLP]




The Board of Directors
Home Bancorp of Elgin, Inc.:


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No.
333-31889) on Form S-8 of Home Bancorp of Elgin, Inc. of our report dated
January 26, 1998, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Home Bancorp of
Elgin, Inc. and subsidiary as of December 31, 1997 and 1996, and the related
consolidated statements of earnings, stockholders' equity and cash flows for
each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 1997, which report
is incorporated by reference in the December 31, 1997 annual report on Form 10-K
of Home Bancorp of Elgin, Inc.


                                   /s/ KPMG Peat Marwick LLP

Chicago, Illinois
March 23, 1998
#### DRESCHER v. DRY DOCK, E. B. & B. R. CO.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

November, 1896.)

Action by Emil Drescher against the Dry Dock, East Broadway & Battery Railroad Company.

PER CURIAM.

An appeal from , the judgment in this case was argued in connection with the case of Gillespie v. Same Defendant, 42 N. Y. Supp. 245, and the same errors are relied upon in each case. The only difference is that in the Gillespie Case the person injured was a servant of the defendant, and questions were raised which grew out of the relation of master and servant. Those questions are not in this case, but in all other respects there is no difference between the two cases, and the conclusion we have reached in the Gillespie Case requires the affirmance of the judgment in this dase also.
Page 1 – SENTENCING MEMORANDUM

KRISTA SHIPSEY, OSB #943850 

The Law Office of Krista Shipsey 

820 SW Second Ave. Suite 275 

Portland, Oregon 97204 

Office Phone: (503) 265-8119 

Facsimile: (503) 273-9175 

shipseylaw@gmail.com 

ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT BLAINE COOPER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

PORTLAND DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

BLAINE COOPER,

Defendant.

No. 3:16-CR-00051-BR-17

SENTENCING MEMORANDUM

The defendant, Blaine Cooper, through his attorney, Krista Shipsey, submits this 

sentencing memorandum in anticipation of the sentencing hearing scheduled for June 

12, 2018 at 11:00am. 

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 2627 Filed 06/05/18 Page 1 of 3
Page 2 - SENTENCING MEMORANDUM

Krista Shipsey

The Law Office of Krista Shipsey

820 S.W. Second Avenue Suite 275

Portland, Oregon 97204

503 265-8119 FAX 503 273-9175

shipseylaw@gmail.com

I. Summary of Defendants Position

Mr. Cooper concurs with the government’s recommendation of time served, 

followed by 2 years of supervised release and the imposition of $7,000 of restitution. 

With respect to conditions of supervised release, the defense has no objection to the 

conditions outlined and recommended by the presentence report, with the exception of 

special condition #2, which states that the defendant must participate in a mental health 

treatment program. Mr. Cooper has been on pre-trial release since his release from 

custody in October 2017. During that time he participated in a mental health 

assessment and it was determined that he was not in need of any further treatment.

 

II. Factual Background

On June 16, 2016 Mr. Cooper pled guilty to Count one of the superseding 

Indictment, charging Conspiracy to Impede Federal Officer by Force, Threat or 

Intimidation under 18 USC 372. Mr. Cooper was among the first to take responsibility 

for his actions in the occupation of the Malheur Wildlife Refuge, and became a 

cooperating witness for the government, testifying in the trial that took place from 

January 2 through February 11, 2016.

 

III. Advisory Sentencing Guideline Calculations

The defense accepts the guideline calculations set forth in the presentence report 

which concludes a total offense level of 11 and a criminal history of 3. (see page 12 of 

the presentence report) which produces a guideline provision of 12-18 months. 

/ / /

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 2627 Filed 06/05/18 Page 2 of 3
Page 3 - SENTENCING MEMORANDUM

Krista Shipsey

The Law Office of Krista Shipsey

820 S.W. Second Avenue Suite 275

Portland, Oregon 97204

503 265-8119 FAX 503 273-9175

shipseylaw@gmail.com

IV. The parties jointly recommend a sentence of time served. In support of this 

recommendation the defense has filed supplemental material to provide the court 

further insight into Mr. Cooper. 

V. Mr. Cooper has previously stipulated to a restitution amount of $7,000. See ECF No. 

2259.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 5th day of June, 2018.

 /s/ Krista Shipsey

Krista Shipsey, OSB #943850

Attorney for Defendant

Blaine Cooper

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 2627 Filed 06/05/18 Page 3 of 3
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2019 

To prevent the reclassification of certain ammunition as armor piercing 

ammunition. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 23, 2015 

Mr. PERRY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To prevent the reclassification of certain ammunition as 

armor piercing ammunition. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘ATF Wrongful Reclas5 sification Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PREVENTION OF RECLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN 

7 AMMUNITION AS ARMOR PIERCING AMMUNI8 TION. 

9 Section 921(a)(17) of title 18, United States Code, 

10 is amended— 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 2019 IH

1 (1) in subparagraph (B)(i), by striking ‘‘may be 

2 used’’ and inserting ‘‘is designed and intended by 

3 the manufacturer solely for use’’; and 

4 (2) in subparagraph (C)— 

5 (A) by striking ‘‘the Attorney General 

6 finds is primarily intended’’ and inserting ‘‘is 

7 primarily intended by the manufacturer’’; and 

8 (B) by striking ‘‘sporting’’ and inserting 

9 ‘‘lawful’’. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### PEOPLE, Respondent, v. FLAGG, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

December 18, 1896.)

Proceeding against Jared Flagg, Jr.

No opinion. Motion dismissed.
Exhibit 99.2

                            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   Amendment   No.  1  to  Annual  Report  of  Altair
Nanotechnologies  Inc. (the  "Company") on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2002 as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"), I, Edward Dickinson,  Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 results of operations of the
Company.


/s/ Edward Dickinson
--------------------------
Edward Dickinson
Chief Financial Officer
April 29, 2003
#### TRUCK DRIVERS, OIL DRIVERS, FILLING STATION & PLATFORM WORKERS, LOCAL 705, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ALMARC MANUFACTURING, INC., Defendant.

No. 82 C 5873.

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D.

Nov. 26, 1982.

MEMORANDUM ORDER

SHADUR, District Judge.

This Court has today entered its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law granting preliminary injunctive relief requiring reinstatement of Almarc’s fired drivers pending determination of the merits of this action. Some added matters also require current consideration:

> 1. Local 705’s motion to supplement the record and to file added proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law is denied, as is Almarc’s post-hearing ex parte submission regarding two of the discharged drivers. Any claimed facts and legal issues posed by those submissions can be presented to the Court in proper fashion and addressed in connection with the determination on the merits.

> 2. No order is being entered against Local 705 with respect to a bond for medical insurance premium payments or for repayment of such premiums if Almarc prevails on the merits. Almarc chose voluntarily to provide such insurance coverage, apparently in an effort to avoid an adverse finding on the irreparable injury issue. It cannot make a condition of that voluntary decision the imposition of its cost on its litigation adversary.

> 3. This action is set for a status hearing December 8,1982 at 9 a.m. to consider implementation of the preliminary injunction and arrangements for the prompt consideration of the ultimate merits.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 

KA THERINE E. MELO, in Her Personal 

Capacity and in Her Capacity as Personal 

Representative to the Estate of Julian 

F. Gildersleeve, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

THE STATE OF OREGON, 

and STEVEN R. FLETCHER, M.D., 

Defendants. 

MCSHANE, Judge: 

Case No. 6:15-cv-02177-MC 

ORDER 

Based on the issues presented in Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration, ECF No. 17, the 

court VA CATES its dismissal order in part as to Plaintiff's Sixth Claim for negligent infliction of 

emotional distress (NIED) against Defendant Steven R. Fletcher, M.D. 

The Court finds that Plaintiffs Sixth Claim for NIED does not arise out of the nucleus of 

operative facts common to the claims over which this Court may properly exercise jurisdiction, 

and the Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over that claim. 28 U.S.C. § 1367. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated this _I (_day of February, 2016. 

I -OPINION AND ORDER 

Michael McShane 

United States District Judge 

Case 6:15-cv-02177-MC Document 20 Filed 02/11/16 Page 1 of 1
BLACKS FORK NEAR ROBERTSON, WYLatitude: 40.959Longitude: -110.58Elevation: 8823

BLACKS FORK NEAR ROBERTSON, WY

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Blacks Fork Jct Site Page...



Blacks Fork Jct

Courtesy NRCS - Go to EF Blacks Fork GS Site Page...



EF Blacks Fork GS

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Buck Pasture Site Page...



Buck Pasture

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Lakefork Basin Site Page...



Lakefork Basin

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Hewinta Site Page...



Hewinta

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Steel Creek Park Site Page...



Steel Creek Park
* 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. 08-50232

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

LUIS FRANCISCO WONG

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 3:06-CR-2186-1

Before KING, BARKSDALE, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Luis Francisco Wong has moved for

leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California,

386 U.S. 738 (1967). Wong has not filed a response. Our independent review of

the record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal.

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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 22, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 174 (Monday, September 13, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 50927]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-19663]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration #17149 and #17150; New York Disaster Number NY-
00209]


Presidential Declaration of a Major Disaster for Public 
Assistance Only for the State of New York

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a Notice of the Presidential declaration of a major 
disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of New York (FEMA-
4615-DR), dated 09/05/2021.
    Incident: Remnants of Hurricane Ida.
    Incident Period: 09/01/2021 through 09/03/2021.

DATES: Issued on 09/05/2021.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 11/04/2021.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 06/06/2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of 
the President's major disaster declaration on 09/05/2021, Private Non-
Profit organizations that provide essential services of a governmental 
nature may file disaster loan applications at the address listed above 
or other locally announced locations.
    The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected 
by the disaster:

Primary Counties: Bronx, Kings, New York, Queens, Richmond, 
Westchester.

    The Interest Rates are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Physical Damage:
  Non-Profit Organizations with Credit Available Elsewhere...      2.000
  Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere      2.000
For Economic Injury:
  Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere      2.000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 17149 8 
and for economic injury is 17150 0.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

James Rivera,
Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2021-19663 Filed 9-10-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8026-03-P