alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### The Honorab le Russell G. Clark, United States District Judge 1 

### for the Western District of Missouri. ___________ No. 96-1005

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Lewis Coker, also known as David * Western District of Missouri. L. Coker, also known as Bucky * Coker, also known as Louis Coker,* [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: April 29, 1996 Filed: May 3, 1996

___________ Before McMILLIAN, WOLLMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.
Following his incarceration on a drug charge, Lewis Coker commenced his term of supervise d release; one of the conditions prohibited him from excessive use of alcohol, and another required h im to notify his probation officer within sevent y-two hours of being arrested or questioned by a law enforcement officer. During his release term, Coker was twice arrested fo r drivin g while intoxicated; Coker failed to notify his probation office r about his second arrest. The government moved to revoke Coker's supervise d release. After a hearing, at which Coker admitted to violating hi s supe rvised release conditions, the district court revoked Coker' s 1 supervised release, and sentenced him to 12 months imprisonment and

### -2-

one year of supervised release. On appeal, Coker argues the district cour t failed to consider an d explicitly state its reason for not permitting him to participate in a substance abuse treatment pr ogram as an alternative to incarceration. We affirm.

A review of the record shows that th e district court revoked Coker's supervised release and sentenced him to imprisonment because Coker posed
a threat to the public, thus rejecting Coker's plea for treatment as a n alternative to incarceration. As Coker was sentenced within the applicabl e Guidel ines sentencing range, the district court was not required t o explicitly state the reason for the sentence imposed. See United States v. Caves , 73 F.3d 823 , 825 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam). Accordingly, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion by sentencin g Coker to 12 months im prisonment. See United States v. Carr , 66 F.3d 981, 983 (8th Cir. 1995) (standard of review).
Finally, as Coker's counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v

. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), we have reviewed the record from th e revocation hearing and find no nonfrivolous issues. See Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988).
The judgment is affirmed.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

May 29, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-3299

CW Bearing USA, Inc:

I am pleased to notify you that the United States Trade Representative has determined to 

grant the above-referenced exclusion request submitted pursuant to the notice published at 83 FR 

32181 (‘July 11 notice’). The exclusion determination is set out in a formal notice which has 

been submitted to Office of the Federal Register for publication (‘the exclusion notice’). A prepublication version of the exclusion notice has been posted on the USTR website, at 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/Notice_of_Product_Exclusions

_5-30-2019.pdf.

The scope of the exclusion is governed by the formal HTSUS language in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice, and not by the product descriptions set out in any particular request 

for exclusion. An exclusion in response to your request has been granted by excluding from the 

additional tariffs products covered by a specially drafted description contained in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice. 

In accordance with the July 11 notice, the exclusion applies as of the July 6, 2018 

effective date of the tariff action, and will extend for one year after the exclusion notice is 

published in the Federal Register. As stated in the exclusion notice, U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection will issue additional instructions on entry guidance and implementation

Sincerely,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
SOFTWARE.NET CORPORATION FORM 10-Q FOR THE PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                          33,199
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,238
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,141
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                52,860
<PP&E>                                           2,427
<DEPRECIATION>                                     374
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  57,188
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           18,581
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        69,286
<OTHER-SE>                                      30,679
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    57,188
<SALES>                                         23,511
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                23,511
<CGS>                                           19,943
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   19,943
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                20,498
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 241
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (16,689)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (16,689)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     51
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (16,740)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.72)
        

</TABLE>
Specimen Common Stock Certificate



 Exhibit 4.6 

 

	
	





 COMMON STOCK 
 NUMBER SHARES 
 DNKN0001 dunkin brands SM

 DUNKIN’ BRANDS GROUP, INC. 
 CUSIP 265504 10 0 
 SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR CERTAIN
DEFINITIONS 
 INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 

THIS CERTIFIES THAT 
 By: is the record holder of 
 FULLY PAID AND
NON-ASSESSABLE SHARES OF COMMON STOCK, $0.001 PAR VALUE PER SHARE, OF 
 DUNKIN’ BRANDS GROUP, INC.

 transferable on the books of the Corporation in person or by duly authorized attorney upon surrender of this
Certificate properly endorsed. This Certificate is not valid until countersigned by the Transfer Agent and registered by the Registrar. 
 WITNESS the facsimile seal of the Corporation and the facsimile signatures of its duly authorized officers. 
 DATED: 
 GENERAL COUNSEL AND SECRETARY PRESIDENT
AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 
 DUNKIN’ BRANDS GROUP, INC. 

INCORPORATED 
 SEAL 
 NOVEMBER 22, 2005 

DELAWARE 
 TRANSFER AGENT 
 AND REGISTRAR 

AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE 







 



 
 DUNKIN’ BRANDS GROUP, INC. 

The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate, shall be construed as though
they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: 
 TEN COM – as tenants in common

 TEN ENT – as tenants by the entireties 

UNIF GIFT MIN ACT – Custodian 
 JT TEN – as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common 
 (Cust) (Minor) 
 under Uniform Gifts to Minors

 Act 
 (State) 
 UNIF TRF MIN ACT- Custodian (until age )

 (Cust) 
 under Uniform Transfers 
 (Minor) 

to Minors Act 
 (State) 
 Additional abbreviations may also be used
though not in the above list. 
 FOR VALUE RECEIVED, hereby sell, assign and transfer(s) unto 

PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE 

(PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS, INCLUDING ZIP CODE, OF ASSIGNEE) 

Shares of the Common Stock represented by the within Certificate, and do(es) hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint

 Attorney 
 to transfer the said stock on the books of the within named Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises. 

Dated X 
 X 
 NOTICE: THE SIGNATURE TO THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST
CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME(S) AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE IN EVERY PARTICULAR WITHOUT ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT OR ANY CHANGE WHATEVER. 
 SIGNATURE(S) GUARANTEED: 
 By 

THE SIGNATURE(S) MUST BE GUARANTEED BY AN ELIGIBLE GUARANTOR INSTITUTION (BANKS, STOCKBROKERS, SAVINGS AND LOAN
ASSOCIATIONS AND CREDIT UNIONS WITH MEMBERSHIP IN AN APPROVED SIGNATURE GUARANTEE MEDALLION PROGRAM), PURSUANT TO S.E.C. RULE 17Ad-15.
Exhibit 99.1

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

May 9, 2006

Board of Directors

Killbuck Bancshares, Inc.

We have reviewed the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of Killbuck Bancshares, Inc. and
its subsidiary as of March 31, 2006, and the related consolidated statements of income for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2006 and 2005, and the consolidated statement of changes in stockholders equity for the three-month
period ended March 31, 2006 and the consolidated statements of cash flows for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2006 and 2005. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Companys management.

We conducted our review in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). A review of interim financial
information consists principally of applying analytical procedures to financial data and making inquiries of persons responsible for financial and accounting matters. It is substantially less in scope than an audit conducted in accordance with the
standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, the objective of which is the expression of an opinion regarding the financial statements taken as a whole. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.

Based on our review, we are not aware of any material modifications that should be made to the accompanying financial statements for them to be in conformity with
accounting principles U.S. generally accepted.

We have previously audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2005, and the related consolidated statements of income, changes in stockholders equity, and cash flows for the year then ended (not presented herein); and in our
report dated February 9, 2006 we expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements.



|                             
|-----------------------------
|/s/ S.R. SNODGRASS, A.C.     
|S.R. Snodgrass, A.C.         
|626 North Fourth Street      
|Steubenville, Ohio 43952-1982
|Phone: 740-282-2771          
|Facsimile: 740-282-1606
CERTIFICATION OF CEO 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 Global Industries, Ltd. ("Global") on Form10-K for the
year ending
December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") on
March 15, 2005 (the "Report"), the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
SS 1350 as adopted pursuant to SS 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge based upon a review of the Report, that:

1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) 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 Global as of the dates and for periods presented as required by such Report.





/S/ WILLIAM J. DORE'William J. Dore'Chief Executive OfficerMarch 15, 2005


This certification is provided pursuant to SS 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, be deemed filed by Global or the certifying officer for purposes of
SS 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement required by SS 906 has been provided to Global 
Industries, Ltd. and will be retained by it and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4342 

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to authorize a new student 

loan forgiveness program. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 26, 2022 

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

referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to authorize 

a new student loan forgiveness program. 

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 ‘‘Affording Students 

5 A Path to Forgiveness Act’’ or the ‘‘ASAP Forgiveness 

6 Act’’. 

7 SEC. 2. LOAN FORGIVENESS PROGRAM FOR EMPLOYMENT. 

8 Section 455 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 

9 U.S.C. 1087e) is amended by adding at the end the fol10 lowing: 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4342 IS

1 ‘‘(r) LOAN FORGIVENESS FOR EMPLOYMENT.— 

2 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall cancel 

3 not more than $30,000 of interest and principal due, 

4 in accordance with paragraph (2), on any eligible 

5 Federal Direct Loan that is in repayment status on 

6 or after the date of enactment of this subsection for 

7 a borrower who— 

8 ‘‘(A) has made not less than 60 monthly 

9 payments on the eligible Federal Direct Loan 

10 pursuant to any repayment plan authorized 

11 under this Act; and 

12 ‘‘(B) has been employed, on a full-time or 

13 part-time basis, for 10 years after graduating 

14 from, or otherwise leaving, the institution of 

15 higher education for which the loan was made 

16 to enable the borrower to enroll. 

17 ‘‘(2) LOAN CANCELLATION AMOUNT.—After the 

18 conclusion of the employment period described in 

19 paragraph (1), the Secretary shall cancel the obliga20 tion to repay not more than $30,000 of principal 

21 and interest due as of the time of such cancellation, 

22 on the eligible Federal Direct Loans made to the 

23 borrower under this part. 

24 ‘‘(3) ELIGIBLE FEDERAL DIRECT LOAN.—In 

25 this subsection, the term ‘eligible Federal Direct 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 4342 IS

1 Loan’ means a Federal Direct Stafford Loan, Fed2 eral Direct PLUS Loan, or Federal Direct Unsub3 sidized Stafford Loan, or a Federal Direct Consoli4 dation Loan. 

5 ‘‘(4) INELIGIBILITY FOR DOUBLE BENEFITS.— 

6 No borrower may, for the same service, receive a re7 duction of loan obligations under both this sub8 section and subsection (m) or section 428J, 428K, 

9 428L, or 460.’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

December 28, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-3259

CW Bearing USA, Inc:

I am pleased to notify you that the United States Trade Representative has determined to 

grant the above-referenced exclusion request submitted pursuant to the notice published at 83 FR 

32181 (‘July 11 notice’). The exclusion determination is set out in a formal notice which has

been submitted to Office of the Federal Register for publication (‘the exclusion notice’). A prepublication version of the exclusion notice has been posted on the USTR website, at 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/12.21.18_Notice_of_Product_E

xclusions.pdf.

The scope of the exclusion is governed by the formal HTSUS language in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice, and not by the product descriptions set out in any particular request 

for exclusion. An exclusion in response to your request has been granted by excluding from the 

additional tariffs the 10-digit HTSUS subheading under which your request was filed. 

In accordance with the July 11 notice, the exclusion applies as of the July 6, 2018 

effective date of the tariff action, and will extend for one year after the exclusion notice is 

published in the Federal Register. As stated in the exclusion notice, U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection will issue additional instructions on entry guidance and implementation.

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
EXHIBIT 32.2

CFO CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In
connection with Form 10-Q of POZEN Inc. (the Company) , as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, William L. Hodges, 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, as amended; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                  |  |  |  |                         |  | 
|----------------- |  |  |  | ----------------------- |  | 
|Date: May 3, 2007 |  |  |  | /s/ William L. Hodges   |  | 
|                  |  |  |  | William L. Hodges       |  | 
|                  |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer |  | 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,
acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
November 1, 2012



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

LYDIA ALCALA

- GARCIA AND JANET SOL IS , Appellants
NO. 14

- 12

- 00175

- CV V.

CITY OF LA MARQUE, T EXAS , Appellee

________________________________ This cause, an appeal from the judgment in favor of appellee, City of La Marque, Texas, signed January 20, 2012, was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find no error in the judgment. We order the judgment of the court b elow AFFIRMED

. We order appellants, Lydia Alcala

- Garcia and Janet Solis, jointly and severally, to pay all costs incurred in this appeal.
We further order this decision certified below for observance.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

January 23, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-4203

Tianhai Electric North America:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20. 

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request concerns a product strategically important or related to 

‘‘Made in China 2025’’ or other Chinese industrial programs.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

October 26, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2286

Heatex, INC:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20. 

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request failed to show that this particular product is available 

only from China.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn
(June 25, 1990)

#### Bank of Smithtown, Appellant, v Cartago Investment & Trading, S. A., et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.

In an action to recover on a promissory note and for money had and received, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Gowan, J.), entered October 4, 1988, as, upon granting the plaintiff’s motion to renew, adhered to its original determination vacating a prior order of attachment of the same court dated March 4, 1988.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, with costs, and, upon renewal, the order of attachment is reinstated.

We find that the new evidence submitted by the plaintiff bank establishes that, under the circumstances, the requested attachment is proper *(see,*CPLR 6201 [3]). Bracken, J. P., Eiber, Sullivan and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.