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

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Area 3 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Monday, February 8, 2010.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sallie Chavez at 1-888-912-1227 or 954-423-7979.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that a meeting of the Area 3 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held Monday, February 8, 2010, at 2:30 p.m. Eastern Time via telephone conference. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate must be made with Sallie Chavez. For more information please contact Ms. Chavez at 1-888-912-1227 or 954-423-7979, or write TAP Office, 1000 South Pine Island Road, Suite 340, Plantation, FL 33324, or post comments to the Web site:                     *http://www.improveirs.org.*

The agenda will include various IRS issues.

Dated: January 15, 2010.

Linda Rivera,

Senior Program Analyst, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. 2010-1124 Filed 1-25-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
**Applied Signal Technology, Inc.
  Exhibit 32.2**



Certification of Chief Financial Officer 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 Report of Applied Signal Technology, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended January 28, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, James E. Doyle, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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 result of operations of the Company.



|/s/ James E. Doyle                                         | Date: March 8, 2005
|---------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------
|James E. Doyle*Vice President and Chief Financial Officer* |
No. 1,884.

#### MURDOCK, Respondent, v. JARDINE et al., Appellants. STRINGFEILD et al., Intervenors and Respondents.

*Appeal from District Court, Park County; Frank Henry, Judge.*

On motion to dismiss appeal.

Decided November 29, 1902.

*Messrs. Toole & Bach, Messrs. H. 'Q. & 8. H. Mclntire,*for Appellants. ■

*Messrs. Kirk & Clinton, Mr. A. P.*Stark, *Mr. A. J. Campbell, Mr. C. II. Fish, Jr.,*and *Mr. T. J. Walsh,*for Nespond-ents.

Per Curiam.

— Upon motion of II. G-. Mclntire, Esquire, of counsel for appellants, this appeal is dismissed, without prejudice, at the cost of appellants.
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 16-3493

___________________________

United States of America,

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

Nathan Adam Smith,

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant.

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Southern District of Iowa - Des Moines

____________

 Submitted: March 21, 2017

Filed: March 30, 2017 

[Unpublished]

____________

Before RILEY, ARNOLD, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

In this direct criminal appeal, Nathan Smith challenges the district court’s1

below-Guidelines-range sentence imposed following his guilty plea to bank fraud. 

The Honorable John A. Jarvey, Chief Judge, United States District Court for

1

the Southern District of Iowa.
His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California,

386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that Smith’s sentence is substantively unreasonable

because there is undue disparity between Smith’s sentence and the sentencesimposed

on his co-defendants. In a supplemental brief, Smith joins counsel in challenging the

substantive reasonableness of his sentence based on the more favorable sentencesthat

his co-defendants received. 

Having carefully reviewed the district court’s careful articulation atsentencing

of the multiple factors that guided the court in fashioning an appropriate sentence, we

conclude that the sentence is not substantively unreasonable. See United States v.

Miller, 57 F.3d 910, 917 (8th Cir. 2009). Further, we have reviewed the record as

required by Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and find no nonfrivolous issues for

appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment, and we grant counsel’s motion to

withdraw.

______________________________

-2-
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000743457
<NAME> 83B.TXT
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         192,412
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  169,692
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               362,104
<PP&E>                                      19,465,962
<DEPRECIATION>                              16,234,729
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,593,337
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           51,882
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,541,455
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,593,337
<SALES>                                        345,393
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               348,938
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  359,029
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (10,091)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (10,091)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (10,091)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.85)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
769 P.2d 1131

#### Lacey SIVAK, Petitioner-Appellant, v. ADA COUNTY, Respondent.

No. 17588.

Court of Appeals of Idaho.

Feb. 28, 1989.

Petition for Review Denied May 17, 1989.

Lacey Sivak, pro se.

No appearance by respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Lacey Sivak, a prison inmate formerly confined in the Ada County jail, appeals a district court decision upholding a magistrate’s order dismissing his petition for writ of habeas corpus. The petition alleged that, during his confinement in the Ada County jail, Sivak had been inadequately fed because his weight decreased by two or three pounds during a one-month period. Because no evidentiary hearing was conducted, we will accept this factual allegation as true. *Mahaffey v. State,*87 Idaho 228, 392 P.2d 279 (1964).

Judicial relief from lawful confinement is available when the conditions of confinement result in cruel and unusual punishment within the meaning of the Eighth Amendment. Here, we agree with the magistrate’s implicit determination that Sivak failed to allege a dietary deprivation sufficiently serious to constitute cruel and unusual punishment. The Eighth Amendment is not implicated by every inmate complaint about the conditions of confinement. The courts are not super-administrators of the prison system. *Wilson v. State,*113 Idaho 563, 746 P.2d 1022 (Ct.App.1987).

The district court upheld the magistrate’s judgment upon a theory of mootness, which need not be explored here. It is sufficient for us to hold, as we do, that the Eighth Amendment predicate for judi*760cial relief was not established in Sivak’s petition.

The order upholding the judgment is affirmed. Costs to respondent.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6960

THOMAS ROWE HOPE, Petitioner - Appellant, versusRONALD ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge. (CA-97-883-2) Submitted: September 10, 1998 Decided: September 29, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas Rowe Hope, Appellant Pro Se. John Kenneth Byrum, Jr., OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge andfind no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Hope v. Angelone , No. CA-97-883-2 (E.D. Va. June 9, 1998).We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 15.4

[ACNIELSEN LOGO]

                                     CONSENT

We hereby consent to the use of information from our monthly reports "Audit
Report Beer and Soft Drink", covering the period January 1993 to December 2004,
on Form 20-F of Quilmes Industrial (QUINSA Societe Anonyme). We further consent
to the use of our name in such Form 20-F, and to the filing of this consent as
an exhibit thereto and to the incorporation of this consent into any
registration statement that Quinsa may file.

      /s/ A.C. Nielsen
      A.C. Nielsen de Colombia S.A. Sucursal Uruguay
      Adrian Sarrica
      Apoderado

Firma(s) Certificada(s) en Sello
de Actuacion Notarial N degrees F 001580206
Acta N degrees 146.-

              /s/ ANA M. PAGANELLI
              [SEAL]

      Tucuman 348-(C1049AAH)Buenos Aires
      Repvblica Argentina
      Phone: 4891-1100                                  [A VNU BUSINESS LOGO]
      Fax: 4891-1120
      e-mail: servicios@acnielsen.com
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2425 Referred in House (RFH)]

  2d Session
                                S. 2425

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 17, 2000

                 Referred to the Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To authorize the Bureau of Reclamation to participate in the planning, 
   design, and construction of the Bend Feed Canal Pipeline Project, 
                    Oregon, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Bend Feed Canal Pipeline Project Act 
of 2000''.

SEC. 2. FEDERAL PARTICIPATION.

    (a) The Secretary of the Interior, in cooperation with the Tumalo 
Irrigation District (referred to in this section as the ``District''), 
is authorized to participate in the planning, design, and construction 
of the Bend Feed Canal Pipeline Project, Oregon.
    (b) The Federal share of the costs of the project shall not exceed 
50 per centum of the total, and shall be non-reimbursable. The District 
shall receive credit from the Secretary toward the District's share of 
the project for any funds the District has provided toward the design, 
planning or construction prior to the enactment of this Act.
    (c) Funds received under this Act shall not be considered a 
supplemental or additional benefit under the Act of June 17, 1902 (82 
Stat. 388) and all Acts amendatory thereof or supplementary thereto.
    (d) Title to facilities constructed under this Act will be held by 
the District.
    (e) Operations and maintenance of the facilities will be the 
responsibility of the District.
    (f) There are authorized to be appropriated $2,500,000 for the 
Federal share of the activities authorized under this Act.

            Passed the Senate October 13 (legislative day, September 
      22), 2000.

            Attest:

                                                    GARY SISCO,

                                                             Secretary.
```
<PAGE>
                                                                    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

In connection with the Annual Report of Mexican Restaurants, Inc. (the Company)
on Form 10-K for the period ending December 28, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Curt
Glowacki, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, 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 Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
         15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d));
         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/ Curt Glowacki

Curt Glowacki
Chief Executive Officer
March 26, 2004

The foregoing certification is being forwarded solely pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter
63 of Title 18, United States Code).
# Bills, Acts, & Laws   

**

----

### Bill Search on Congress.gov

### Commonly Searched for Legislation

-  118th Congress 
-  117th Congress 

### Research

          -  How to Find Bill Numbers 
          -  How to Find Copies of Bills 
          -  How to Find Laws, Acts, & Statutes 
          -  Enactment of a Law (Congress.gov)                                

----

 

Appropriations Bills (1986-Present)*Select a Year202420232022202120202019201820172016201520142013201220112010200920082007200620052004200320022001200019991998199719961995199419931992199119901989198819871986

*Tables list appropriation bills, hearings, and reports by fiscal year. Beginning with FY2017, tables link to Congress.gov or the Congressional Research Service.

For more detail on process, read:
        -  *The Congressional Appropriations Process: An Introduction*  (CRS) (PDF) 
        -  *Overview of the Authorization-Appropriations Process* (CRS) (PDF) 

**Budget Process** 

The president submits a budget to Congress by the first Monday in February every year. The budget contains estimates of federal government income and spending for the upcoming fiscal year and also recommends funding levels for the federal government. Congress then must pass appropriations bills based on the president's recommendations and Congressional priorities.  If Congress does not pass all appropriations measures by the start of the fiscal year (October 1), it has to enact a continuing resolution to keep the government running.
        -  Budget of the United States Government (GPO - govInfo) 
        -  About the U.S. Government Budget and Process (CRS) 
        -  Additional Resources 

----

• 20-year Comparison of Senate Legislative Activity (PDF)        

• Public Laws Granting Honorary U. S. Citizenship

• Vetoes, 1789 to Present

• Measures Proposed to Amend the Constitution

• Résumé of Congressional Activity (1947 to Present)

        -  Bills, Acts, & Laws 
        -  Nominations 
        -  Treaties 
        -  Votes 
        -  Floor Proceedings 
        -  Rules & Procedure 
        -  Landmark Legislation 
        -  Sessions of Congress 
        -  Senate Archives 
        -  Public Disclosure 

### Legislative Keys 

Key to Versions of Printed LegislationKey to Legislative Citations

### Calendar of Business 

Current (GPO-govInfo)Past Calendars (GPO-govInfo)About the Calendar

### Related Links 

Types of Legislation
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

CRAIG GRAHAM,

 Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

 State.

'

'

'

'

'

'

No. 08-13-00115-CR

Appeal from the

384

th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas 

(TC# 20120D01804)

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the State=s third motion for extension of time to file the brief 

until March 19, 2014. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE 

THE STATE=S BRIEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that the Hon. Jaime Esparza, the State’s Attorney, prepare the 

State=s brief and forward the same to this Court on or before March 19, 2014.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 5th day of February, 2014.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, C.J., Rivera and Rodriguez, JJ.
[File No. 5959.]

#### FIRST STATE BANK OF GRANVILLE, a Corporation, Respondent, v. W. R. BOND, Appellant.

(237 N. W. 709.)

Opinion filed July 14, 1931.

*John O. Hancheit,*for appellant.

*Robert H. Boswrd,*for respondent.

Buree, J.

This is a companion case of First State Bank v. Cox, *180ante, 175, 237 N. W. 708. It was tried on tbe same statement of facts and tbe same briefs. Following tbe decision in tbe said First State Bank v. Cox, ante, 237 N. W. 708, decided at tbis term and for tbe same reasons tbe judgment in tbis case is affirmed.

CheistiaNsoN, Cb. J., and Birdzell, Nuessle, and Burr, JJ., concur.
II

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2167

To suspend until June 30, 2003, the duty on transformers for use in certain

radiobroadcast receivers capable of receiving signals on AM and FM

frequencies.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 2, 2000

Mr. KENNEDY introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To suspend until June 30, 2003, the duty on transformers

for use in certain radiobroadcast receivers capable of

receiving signals on AM and FM frequencies.

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

3 SECTION 1. SUSPENSION OF DUTY ON TRANSFORMERS FOR

4 USE IN CERTAIN RADIOBROADCAST RECEIV5 ERS CAPABLE OF RECEIVING SIGNALS ON AM

6 AND FM FREQUENCIES.

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of

8 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is
2

•S 2167 IS

1 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following

2 new heading:

‘‘ 9902.85.04 120/60Hz electrical transformers (provided for in subheading

8504.31.40),

with dimensions

not exceeding

78mm by

64.5mm by

88.7mm and containing stacked

EI laminations

with an integral

bobbin, imported

for use as components in

radiobroadcast

receivers with

digital clock or

clock-timer, valued over $40

each (provided

for in subheading

8527.32.50), the

foregoing which

include a resonant system

tuned to at least

five audible frequencies ............. Free No change No change On or before

6/30/2003 ’’.

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

4 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or

5 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after

6 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
Exhibit 32.1


                         ASHLIN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION


                            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 Annual Report of Ashlin Development Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, James Brown, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and Secretary of the Company,
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 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/James A. Brown
------------------------
James A. Brown
Chief Executive Officer
March 31, 2005
#  Determination On the Proposed Agreement Between the Government of the United States of America And the Government of Australia Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy 

# Memorandum for the Secretary of State [and] the Secretary of Energy 

I have considered the proposed Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of Australia Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy, along with the views, recommendations, and statements of the interested departments and agencies.

I have determined that the performance of the Agreement will promote, and will not constitute an unreasonable risk to, the common defense and security.  Pursuant to section 123 b. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2153(b)), I hereby approve the proposed Agreement and authorize the Secretary of State to arrange for its execution.

                    The Secretary of State is authorized to publish this determination in the                     *Federal Register*.                

[FR Doc. 2010-11727

Billing code 4710-10-P