alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
H. Res. 1372 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

May 27, 2010. 

Whereas, on June 10, 1910, the University of Georgia organized its graduate education practices under the guidance 

of Professor Willis Henry Bocock, who became the first 

dean of the Graduate School; 

Whereas the Graduate School has contributed to elevating 

and maintaining the University of Georgia as one of the 

preeminent public universities in the United States; 

Whereas these contributions are a reflection of the great leadership of the Graduate School’s first dean, Dr. Bocock, 

and those who succeeded him: R.P. Stephens, George H. 

Boyd, Gerald B. Huff, Thomas H. Whitehead, Hardy M. 

Edwards, Jr., John C. Dowling, Gordhan L. Patel, and 

the present dean, Maureen Grasso; 

Whereas the Graduate School has grown from 7 students in 

1910 to more than 7,000 today; 

Whereas the Graduate School has awarded master’s, specialist, and doctoral degrees to more than 73,000 individuals who occupy leadership roles in school systems, institutions of higher learning, business, government, and 

nonprofit organizations; 
2 

•HRES 1372 EH 

Whereas the Graduate School includes more than 350 fields 

of study and contributes to new knowledge and advancements in academic research; and 

Whereas Graduate School graduates have made significant 

contributions to the economic development and competitiveness of the State of Georgia and the United States: 

Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

(1) recognizes the centennial of the founding and 

organization of the University of Georgia Graduate 

School; and 

(2) expresses sincere appreciation to the students 

and administrators who contribute to the growth and 

success of the University of Georgia Graduate School. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
---

Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Joerg Ott, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

| | (1) | the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of GBS Enterprises
      Incorporated for the fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2010 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 Form 10-Q fairly
      presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of GBS Enterprises Incorporated.                                                         

|Date: February 22, 2011 | /s/
      Joerg Ott                  
|----------------------- | -------------------------------------
|                        | Joerg Ott                            
|                        | President and Chief Executive Officer
|                        | (Principal Executive Officer)        

---
Exhibit 99.1
 WILLIAMS PIPELINE GP LLC
 CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
 September 30,
    
    
    December 31,2009
    
    
    2008(Unaudited)(Thousands of dollars)ASSETSCurrent assets:Cash and cash equivalents
    
    $
    7,911
    
    
    $
    7,760Prepaid expense
    
    
    323
    
    
    
    184Total current assets
    
    
    8,234
    
    
    
    7,944Investment in Northwest Pipeline GP
    
    
    420,030
    
    
    
    414,069Total assets
    
    $
    428,264
    
    
    $
    422,013LIABILITIES AND EQUITYCurrent liabilities:Accounts payable:Trade
    
    $
    492
    
    
    $
    671Affiliate
    
    
    473
    
    
    
    424Total current liabilities
    
    
    965
    
    
    
    1,095Contingent liabilities and commitmentsEquity:Williams Pipeline GP LLCs equity
    
    
    95,473
    
    
    
    92,305Notes receivable  affiliate
    
    
    (1
    )
    
    
    (1
    )Accumulated other comprehensive loss
    
    
    (6,161
    )
    
    
    (6,612
    )Total Williams Pipeline GP LLCs equity
    
    
    89,311
    
    
    
    85,692Noncontrolling interest in consolidated subsidiary
    
    
    337,988
    
    
    
    335,226Total equity
    
    
    427,299
    
    
    
    420,918Total liabilities and equity
    
    $
    428,264
    
    
    $
    422,013




---



##### 



WILLIAMS PIPELINE GP LLC
 NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
(Unaudited)
 Note 1. Organization and Basis of Presentation
     Note 2. Credit Agreement
  Note 3. Owners Equity
  GeneralQuarterly Distribution Target Amount (per unit)
    
    Unitholders
    
    PartnerMinimum quarterly distribution of $0.2875
    
    
    98
    %
    
    
    2
    %Up to $0.330625
    
    
    98
    
    
    
    2Above $0.330625 up to $0.359375
    
    
    85
    
    
    
    15Above $0.359375 up to $0.431250
    
    
    75
    
    
    
    25Above $0.431250
    
    
    50
    
    
    
    50
 Note 4. Disclosures About the Fair Value of Financial Instruments
  Cash and cash equivalents
Page 1 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

CEA CASES 

NAME: ROBERT E. GOLDBERG 

DOCKET NUMBER: STIPULATION 76 

DATE: SEPTEMBER 29, 1965 

DOCUMENT TYPE: STIPULATION OF COMPLIANCE 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

BEFORE THE SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE 

In re: Robert E. Goldberg 

Stipulation of Compliance Under the Commodity Exchange Act No. 76 

The Secretary of Agriculture has reason to believe that Robert E. Goldberg 

has violated the provisions of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C., Chapter 1) 

and the regulations of the Secretary of Agriculture promulgated thereunder (17 

CFR, Chapter 1). No complaint with respect to such violations has been issued 

and the said Robert E. Goldberg is desirous of disposing of the matter by 

entering into a stipulation of compliance as authorized by section 0.4(a) of the 

Rules of Practice under the Commodity Exchange Act (17 CFR, Part 0). Therefore, 

the said Robert E. Goldberg stipulates the following facts are true: 

(1) Robert E. Goldberg, an individual whose address is 141 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, is now and was on August 13, 1965, a 

registered floor broker under the Commodity Exchange Act and a member of the 

Board of Trade of the City of Chicago, a duly designated contract market under 

the Commodity Exchange Act. 

(2) On August 13, 1965, Robert E. Goldberg executed 106 transactions in 

regulated commodity futures on the Board of Trade of the City of Chicago. 

However, with respect to 103 of such transactions, in each instance he failed to 

prepare a trading card or other record 

clearly identifying the opposite floor broker or other trader with whom such 

transaction was executed. 

The Secretary of Agriculture has advised Robert E. Goldberg that his failure 

to keep full and complete records of futures transactions, as described above, 

was in violation of section 4g of the Commodity Exchange Act and section 1.35 of 

the regulations under the Commodity Exchange Act. 

The said Robert E. Goldberg agrees to desist from such acts and practices in 

the future. He further understands and agrees that this stipulation shall be 

admissible as evidence of such acts and practices in any future proceeding based 

upon acts or practices in addition to those referred to herein which may be 

brought against him by the Secretary of Agriculture under the provisions of the 

said act. He also understands that it is the practice of the Commodity Exchange 

Authority to make stipulations of compliance a matter of public record. 

Done at Chicago, Illinois, this 29 day of September 1965 

[SEE SIGNATURE IN ORIGINAL] 

Witnessed by: 

[SEE SIGNATURE IN ORIGINAL] 
Page 2 

[SEE SIGNATURE IN ORIGINAL] 

LOAD-DATE: June 16, 2008 
Page 3
H. Res. 1236 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

April 14, 2010. 

Whereas coal mining is a time-honored profession and miners 

and their families have shaped the history and rich culture of West Virginia and the Nation; 

Whereas the Nation is greatly indebted to coal miners for the 

difficult and dangerous work they perform to provide the 

fuel needed to keep the Nation strong and secure; 

Whereas the Nation has long recognized the importance of 

health and safety protections for miners who labor in extreme and dangerous conditions; 

Whereas accidents in the Nation’s mines have again and 

again taken the lives of coal miners; 

Whereas 29 West Virginia miners tragically perished in the 

Upper Big Branch Mine-South following an explosion on 

April 5, 2010; 

Whereas this was the worst coal mining disaster in the Nation over the last 40 years; 

Whereas Federal, State, and local rescue crews worked tirelessly night and day in courageous rescue and recovery 

efforts; 

Whereas the families of the fallen miners have suffered immeasurable loss; and 
2 

•HRES 1236 EH 

Whereas residents of Raleigh County and throughout West 

Virginia came together to support the miners’ families: 

Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

(1) recognizes the ultimate sacrifice made by the 29 

coal miners lost at the Upper Big Branch Mine-South, 

Raleigh County, West Virginia; 

(2) extends the deepest condolences of the Nation 

to the families of these men; 

(3) recognizes all coal miners for enduring the loss 

of their coworkers and maintaining courage throughout 

this ordeal; 

(4) commends the rescue crews for their valiant efforts to find these miners; and 

(5) honors the many volunteers who provided support and comfort for the miners’ families during the rescue and recovery operations. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<CURRENCY> NO
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998             SEP-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                   1.00                    1.00
<CASH>                                          83,651                 101,678
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0                       0
<PP&E>                                         405,467                 405,467
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,023,259               1,047,599
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0                       0
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,023,259               1,047,599
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,023,259               1,047,599
<SALES>                                              0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 4,618                   6,581
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                15,873                  35,377
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (11,255)                (28,796)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (11,255)                (28,796)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (11,255)                (28,796)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0
        

</TABLE>
```

[Federal Register: September 9, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 174)]
[Notices]
[Page 48199]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr09se98-45]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

TIME AND DATE: 11:00 a.m., Wednesday, September 30, 1998.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., N.W., Washington, D.C., 9th Floor Conference
Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Enforcement matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5100.
Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 98-24280 Filed 9-4-98; 11:37 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```

----

**======== RETURN TO INDEX    ========**

----
IV 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1372 

Honoring the University of Georgia Graduate School on the occasion of 

its centennial. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 19, 2010 

Mr. BROUN of Georgia (for himself, Mr. BARROW, Mr. BISHOP of Georgia, 

Mr. KINGSTON, Mr. PRICE of Georgia, Mr. WESTMORELAND, Ms. TITUS, 

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania, Mr. GINGREY of Georgia, Mr. SCOTT of 

Georgia, and Mr. LEWIS of Georgia) submitted the following resolution; 

which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor 

RESOLUTION 

Honoring the University of Georgia Graduate School on the 

occasion of its centennial. 

Whereas, on June 10, 1910, the University of Georgia organized its graduate education practices under the guidance 

of Professor Willis Henry Bocock, who became the first 

dean of the Graduate School; 

Whereas the Graduate School has contributed to elevating 

and maintaining the University of Georgia as one of the 

preeminent public universities in the United States; 

Whereas these contributions are a reflection of the great leadership of the Graduate School’s first dean, Dr. Bocock, 

and those who succeeded him: R.P. Stephens, George H. 

Boyd, Gerald B. Huff, Thomas H. Whitehead, Hardy M. 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 1372 IH 

Edwards, Jr., John C. Dowling, Gordhan L. Patel, and 

the present dean, Maureen Grasso; 

Whereas the Graduate School has grown from 7 students in 

1910 to more than 7,000 today; 

Whereas the Graduate School has awarded master’s, specialist, and doctoral degrees to more than 73,000 individuals who occupy leadership roles in school systems, institutions of higher learning, business, government, and 

nonprofit organizations; 

Whereas the Graduate School includes more than 350 fields 

of study and contributes to new knowledge and advancements in academic research; and 

Whereas Graduate School graduates have made significant 

contributions to the economic development and competitiveness of the State of Georgia and the United States: 

Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) recognizes the centennial of the founding 

3 and organization of the University of Georgia Grad4 uate School; and 

5 (2) expresses sincere appreciation to the stu6 dents and administrators who contribute to the 

7 growth and success of the University of Georgia 

8 Graduate School. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 21


           Principal Subsidiaries of Global Payment Technologies, Inc.


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                  Jurisdiction         Percentage Ownership
                  Name of Subsidiary                              Incorporation         by the Registrant
--------------------------------------------------------------    -------------        --------------------
<S>                                                              <C>                          <C>
Global Payment Technology Holdings (Proprietary) Limited          South Africa                23.5%

International Payment Systems Pty Ltd.                            South Africa                30%

Global Payment Technologies Australia Pty. Ltd.                     Australia                 50%

Global Payment Technologies (Europe) Limited                     United Kingdom               70%

CBV China Venture Limited                                           Delaware                  50%
   - Hangzhou CBV Plastics Corp. Ltd.                                 China                   100%

Abacus Financial Management Systems Limited                      United Kingdom               25%

Abacus Financial Management Systems Ltd., USA                    United States                80%
</TABLE>
#### MapleWood Equity Partners, L.P., et al., Appellants, v Casita, L.P., et al., Respondents.

[873 NYS2d 906]

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Helen E. Freedman, J.), entered January 2, 2008, which granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

This action, filed approximately 20 months after the publication of the allegedly defamatory statements, is barred by the one-year statute of limitations (CPLR 215 [3]), and there was no basis for tolling the statute *(see Shared Communications Servs. of ESR, Inc. v Goldman, Sachs &*Co., 38 AD3d 325 [2007]). In any event, these statements were either privileged under Civil Rights Law § 74 *(see Freeze Right Refrig. & A.C.*
      *488
      *Servs. v City of New York,*101 AD2d 175 [1984]), subject to a qualified privilege *(see Foster v Churchill,*87 NY2d 744, 751 [1996]), protected as pure opinion *(see Milkovich v Lorain Journal Co.,*497 US 1, 17-21 [1990]), or not pleaded with sufficient particularity *(see Murganti v Weber,*248 AD2d 208 [1998]). Concur—Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Acosta and Renwick, JJ. *[See*2007 NY Slip Op 34257(U).]
EXHIBIT 12.1
 Oncothyreon Inc. and Consolidated Subsidiaries
 Computation of Deficiency in the Coverage of Fixed Charges by Earnings Before Fixed Charges
 For the SixMonthsEndedJune 30, 2008Earnings before fixed charges:Loss from continuing operations before income taxes, minority
interest and income/(loss) from equity investees
    
    $
    (10,030
    )Add fixed charges
    
    
    19Add amortization of capitalized interest
    
    
    Add distributed income of equity investees
    
    
    Subtract capitalized interest
    
    
    Loss before fixed charges
    
    $
    (10,011
    )Fixed charges:Interest expense
    
    $
    4Amortization of debt expense
    
    
    Estimate of interest expense within rental expense
    
    
    15Preference security dividend requirements of consolidated subsidiaries
    
    
    Total fixed charges
    
    $
    19Deficiency of earnings available to cover fixed charges
    
    $
    (10,030
    )
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Guillermo ARREDONDO BENITEZ, aka Guillermo Benitez, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 09-50589.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Oct. 4, 2010.*

Filed Oct. 13, 2010.

*296Michael J. Raphael, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los An-geles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Kurt J. Mayer, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Office of the Federal Public Defender, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: PREGERSON, D.W. NELSON and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Guillermo Arredondo Benitez (“Arredon-do Benitez”) appeals his sentence of 60 months imprisonment imposed by the federal district court for one count of being an illegal alien found in the United States following deportation. We have jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3732(a), and we affirm the district court.

Arredondo Benitez contends that the district court erred in assigning him one criminal history point under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines for an unlicensed driving conviction in California state court that resulted in 24 months of summary probation. Because Arredondo Benitez did not raise this objection before the district court, we review only for plain error. *United States v. Guzman-Mata,*579 F.3d 1065, 1068 (9th Cir.2009).

Arredondo Benitez claims his term of probation should not count under the Guidelines because, he asserts, his presen-tence report indicates the term was suspended. This assertion is contradicted by the California Penal Code, which makes clear that probation is a result of a suspended sentence, and not something that is itself suspended. *See*CahPenal Code § 1203(a). Arredondo Benitez contends that in *United States v. Mejia,*559 F.3d 1113, 1115-16 (9th Cir.2009), this court interpreted a suspended sentence similar to his as describing a suspension of summary probation. However, other statements in *Mejia*make clear that the court saw suspension of the sentence (which eliminated all but 16 days of the prison term) and termination of probation (which eliminated all but 3 days of probation) as two distinct acts. *See id.*Thus, the district court did not plainly err in concluding *297Arredondo Benitez’s term of probation had not been suspended.

Arredondo Benitez also argues summary probation does not count as “probation” under the Guidelines because it lacks a supervisory or custodial component. This argument is contradicted by our decision in *United States v. McCrudden,*894 F.2d 338, 339 (9th Cir.1990), which states that “[t]he guidelines make no provision for treating ‘unsupervised’ probation as less than probation. Even if unsupervised, probation can be revoked and replaced by a sentence of greater punishment if further offenses are committed during the probationary period.” Thus, the district court did not plainly err in treating summary probation as “probation” under the Guidelines.

AFFIRMED.

**

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