alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD

_________________________________

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD,

Complainant

vs.

TODD F. BRICE,

Respondent.

_________________________________

Docket Number 2023-0487

Enforcement Activity No. 7836024

CONSENT ORDER

Issued: February 12, 2024

By Administrative Law Judge: Honorable Timothy G. Stueve

Appearances:

LT Joshua B. French

Sector Mobile

LCDR Lynn Buchanan, Esq.

S&R NCOE

For the Coast Guard

Todd F. Brice, Pro Se

For Respondent
CONSENT ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

On or about February 1, 2024, the parties in this case submitted a Motion for Approval of 

Settlement Agreement and Entry of Consent Order to be approved as a settlement of the case 

under 33 C.F.R. § 20.502.

I have carefully reviewed the terms of the Settlement Agreement and find it is fair and 

reasonable and in substantial compliance with the requirements of 33 C.F.R. § 20.502.

ORDER

Upon consideration of the record, it is hereby ORDERED, the Settlement Agreement is 

APPROVED in full and incorporated herein by reference. This Consent Order shall constitute 

full, final, and complete adjudication of this proceeding.

Done and dated February 12, 2024, at

Alameda, California

 

_____________________

Honorable Timothy G. Stueve

Administrative Law Judge

U.S. Coast Guard
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 74 (Monday, April 17, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20465-20466]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-9420]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Office of the Secretary


Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation; 
Delegation of Authority

    Notice is hereby given that I have delegated to the Assistant 
Secretary for Planning and Evaluation all authorities under Section 
2108(c) of Title XXI of the Social Security Act, titled ``Federal 
Evaluation of State Children's Health Insurance Program,'' as amended 
hereafter. These authorities shall be implemented in consultation with 
the Health Care Financing Administration, the Health Resources and 
Services

[[Page 20466]]

Administration, and other relevant components within the Department.
    These delegations shall be exercised under the Department's 
existing delegation of authority and policy on regulations. In 
addition, I hereby affirm and ratify any actions taken by you or your 
subordinates that involved the exercise of the authorities delegated 
herein prior to the effective date of this delegation.
    This delegation is effective immediately.

Donna E. Shalala,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-9420 Filed 4-14-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4150-04-M
#### Allen Dewayne BATES, Plaintiff—Appellant v. Joe L. OROZCO, Defendant—Appellee.

No. 10-10490

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

April 29, 2011.

Allen Dewayne Bates, Amarillo, TX, pro se.

Mark Whitney McBrayer, Crenshaw, Dupree & Milam, L.L.P., Lubbock, TX, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before BARKSDALE, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Proceeding *pro se*and *informa pauper-is,*Allen Dewayne Bates appeals the district court’s dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint, with prejudice, by granting Officer Joe L. Orozco’s motion for summary judgment. Bates contends the district court erred in ruling that Officer Orozco was entitled to qualified immunity. Bates claims Officer Orozco violated Bates’ Fourth Amendment rights because there *280was no probable cause justifying his initial detention, subsequent searches, and arrest.

A summary judgment is reviewed *de novo. E.g., Xtreme Lashes, LLC v. Xtended Beauty, Inc.,*576 F.3d 221, 226 (5th Cir.2009). When defendant asserts qualified immunity, the court must determine whether plaintiff presents a violation of a statutory or constitutional right and, if he does, “whether that right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct”. *Ontiveros v. City of Rosenberg,*564 F.3d 379, 382 (5th Cir. 2009).

Bates fails to show he was subjected to an unlawful detention, search, or arrest. Officer Orozco had articulable facts supporting his reasonable suspicion that justified Bates’ initial detention. *See United States v. Michelletti,*13 F.3d 838, 840 (5th Cir.1994) (en banc). Additionally, Officer Orozco’s actions following the initial detention were reasonably related to the circumstances justifying it. *See United States v. Brigham,*382 F.3d 500, 506-07 (5th Cir. 2004). Because Bates did not show a violation of the claimed constitutional right, the district court properly granted summary judgment on ruling that Officer Orozco was entitled to qualified immunity. *See Ontiveros,*564 F.3d at 385.

AFFIRMED.

*

 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.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 v. 

ANTONIO OLIVERA, 

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 21-50043 

D.C. No. 2:19-cr-00528-CJC-1 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Cormac J. Carney, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 16, 2022**

Before: SILVERMAN, MILLER, and BUMATAY, Circuit Judges. 

Antonio Olivera appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges 

his guilty-plea conviction and 30-month sentence for conspiracy to commit health 

care fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 

U.S. 738 (1967), Olivera’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

MAR 23 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 21-50043 

grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have 

provided Olivera the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se 

supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed. 

Olivera waived the right to appeal his conviction, with the exception of an 

appeal based on a claim that his plea was involuntary, and most aspects of his

sentence. Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 

U.S. 75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the waiver. See

United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th Cir. 2009). We therefore 

dismiss the appeal as to all issues covered by the appeal waiver. We affirm as to 

all other issues because our review of the record discloses no arguable grounds for 

relief as to the voluntariness of Olivera’s plea or any aspect of the sentence that 

falls outside the scope of the appeal waiver. 

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1872 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1872

             To authorize Energy Frontier Research Centers.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 16, 2015

 Mr. Grayson introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
              Committee on Science, Space, and Technology

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
             To authorize Energy Frontier Research Centers.

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

SECTION 1. ENERGY FRONTIER RESEARCH CENTERS.

    (a) In General.--The Director shall carry out a program to provide 
awards, on a competitive, merit-reviewed basis, to multi-institutional 
collaborations or other appropriate entities to conduct fundamental and 
use-inspired energy research to accelerate scientific breakthroughs 
related to needs identified in--
            (1) the Grand Challenges report of the Department's Basic 
        Energy Sciences Advisory Committee;
            (2) the report of the Department's Basic Energy Sciences 
        Advisory Committee entitled ``From Quanta to the Continuum: 
        Opportunities for Mesoscale Science'';
            (3) the Basic Energy Sciences Basic Research Needs workshop 
        report; or
            (4) other relevant reports identified by the Director.
    (b) Collaborations.--A collaboration receiving an award under this 
subsection may include multiple types of institutions and private 
sector entities.
    (c) Selection and Duration.--
            (1) In general.--A collaboration under this subsection 
        shall be selected for a period of 5 years. An Energy Frontier 
        Research Center already in existence and supported by the 
        Director on the date of enactment of this Act may continue to 
        receive support for a period of 5 years beginning on the date 
        of establishment of that center.
            (2) Reapplication.--After the end of the period described 
        in paragraph (1), an awardee may reapply for selection for a 
        second period of 5 years on a competitive, merit-reviewed 
        basis.
            (3) Termination.--Consistent with the existing authorities 
        of the Department, the Director may terminate an 
        underperforming center for cause during the performance period.
    (d) No Funding for Construction.--No funding provided pursuant to 
this subsection may be used for the construction of new buildings or 
facilities.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                         602,665
<SECURITIES>                                 4,894,577
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,758,014
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,353,633
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            10,033,616
<PP&E>                                      30,742,134
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,295,003
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              41,987,864
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,017,075
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        82,079
<OTHER-SE>                                  37,433,872
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                41,987,894
<SALES>                                     13,629,606
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            14,647,501
<CGS>                                       10,001,376
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               14,203,175
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               131,035
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (442,534)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (148,682)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (293,852)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.03)
        

</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of Anthony Castricone, Appellant, v Lucy Taylor Welch, or Director for Orleans County Probation Department, Respondent.

Submitted February 20, 2007;

decided March 27, 2007

On the Court’s own motion, appeal dismissed, without costs, upon the ground that the order appealed from does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution. Motion for poor person relief dismissed as academic.
IIB 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 235 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 10, 2015 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

AN ACT 

To permanently extend the Internet Tax Freedom Act. 

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


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 235 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Permanent Internet 

3 Tax Freedom Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. PERMANENT MORATORIUM ON INTERNET ACCESS 

5 TAXES AND MULTIPLE AND DISCRIMINATORY 

6 TAXES ON ELECTRONIC COMMERCE. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1101(a) of the Internet 

8 Tax Freedom Act (47 U.S.C. 151 note) is amended by 

9 striking ‘‘during the period beginning November 1, 2003, 

10 and ending October 1, 2015’’. 

11 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

12 this section shall apply to taxes imposed after the date 

13 of the enactment of this Act. 

Passed the House of Representatives June 9, 2015. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
OWRD 11495600 - S FK SPRAGUE R BL FISHHOLE CR NR BLYLatitude: 42.42Longitude: -121.04Elevation: None

OWRD 11495600 - S FK Sprague R Bl Fishhole CR Nr Bly

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Quartz Mountain Site Page...



Quartz Mountain

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Strawberry Site Page...



Strawberry

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Gerber Reservoir Site Page...



Gerber Reservoir
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS DATED MARCH 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                       1,490,626
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,245,690
<ALLOWANCES>                                    26,682
<INVENTORY>                                  3,000,561
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,094,860
<PP&E>                                       1,946,673
<DEPRECIATION>                                 523,861
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,806,449
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,528,033
<BONDS>                                        464,668
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         6,648
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,775,089
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,806,449
<SALES>                                      3,442,855
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,442,855
<CGS>                                        1,600,926
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,311,683
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,710,757
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              61,895
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 69,277
<INCOME-TAX>                                    32,283
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             36,994
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    36,994
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .00
        

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

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                       7,550,233
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                            12,168,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                132,253,852
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                    797,339,184
<ALLOWANCE>                                  7,084,991
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             979,553,963
<DEPOSITS>                                 432,053,516
<SHORT-TERM>                               368,800,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          9,780,651
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       171,925
<OTHER-SE>                                 168,747,871
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             979,553,963
<INTEREST-LOAN>                             43,965,366
<INTEREST-INVEST>                            8,177,630
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            52,142,996
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                          17,427,204
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          30,015,162
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                       22,127,834
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                 (45,407)
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                           5,741,123
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                             12,180,788
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             16,467,385
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                  10,025,344
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                10,025,344
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .64
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .61
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.95
<LOANS-NON>                                  4,039,035
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                               585,805
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             7,611,675
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  528,335
<RECOVERIES>                                   480,977
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            7,084,991
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                         7,084,991
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of Joshua Albert, Petitioner, v Samuel J. Rozzi, as Commissioner of the Nassau County Police Department, et al., Respondents.

— Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Nassau County Police Department, dated October 23, 1984, which, after a hearing, revoked the petitioner’s pistol license for a period of 18 months, and limited the petitioner thereafter to possession of one firearm for target purposes in the event the petitioner successfully reapplied for a license.

*665Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.

The determination that the petitioner failed to “truthfully cooperate” in the investigation regarding his possession and use of a weapon is amply supported by the evidence adduced at the hearing. At the hearing, two police officers credibly testified that when questioned, the petitioner denied having any weapon on his person other than the shotgun he was then holding, when in fact, the petitioner was also in possession of a pistol at the time. In light of the foregoing, the hearing officer’s determination that the petitioner failed to “truthfully cooperate” with respect to his possession of the pistol is supported by substantial evidence (see, *300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights,*45 NY2d 176).

The penalty imposed was not so disproportionate to the offense as to shock one’s sense of fairness *(see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ.,*34 NY2d 222).

Finally, we have considered the parties’ other contentions and find them to be without merit. Rubin, J. P., Lawrence, Hooper and Spatt, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.333-82260, 333-60099, 333-31699, and 333-137025 on Form S-8 of our reports dated April 4, 2007, relating to the consolidated financial statements of Coldwater Creek Inc. (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes explanatoryparagraphs relating to the adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123(R), *Share-Based Payment*, and the recognition provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 158, *Employers’ Accountingfor Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans—an amendment of FASB Statements No. 87, 88, 106, and 132(R)*), and management’s report on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, appearing in thisAnnual Report on Form 10-K of Coldwater Creek Inc. for the year ended February 3, 2007. 

/s/    DELOITTE &TOUCHE LLP 

Portland, Oregon 

April 4,2007
---

---

EXHIBIT 14.1

# Consent of Independent
Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the incorporation by
reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 No. 333-12904) pertaining to the
Employees Share Purchase plan and the Share Incentive Plan of Tikcro Technologies
Ltd. of our report dated March 25, 2006, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements of Tikcro Technologies Ltd. included in this Annual Report on Form 20-F for the
year ended December 31, 2005.

|                 |                                    
|---------------- | -----------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|June 23, 2006    | /s/ KOST, FORER GABBAY and KASIERER
|Tel-Aviv, Israel | A Member of Ernst & Young Global   



---

---