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

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4081

To direct the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is

operating to submit to the Congress a plan and cost estimate for the

engineering, design, and retrofitting of the icebreaker MACKINAW.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 17, 1996

Mr. OBERSTAR (for himself, Mr. OBEY, Mr. KILDEE, Mr. DINGELL, Mr. VISCLOSKY, Mr. LATOURETTE, Mr. HOKE, Mr. LAFALCE, Mr. GUTIERREZ,

Mr. STUPAK, Ms. KAPTUR, and Mr. BROWN of Ohio) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and

Infrastructure

A BILL

To direct the Secretary of the department in which the

Coast Guard is operating to submit to the Congress

a plan and cost estimate for the engineering, design,

and retrofitting of the icebreaker MACKINAW.

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

3 SECTION 1. PLAN FOR THE ENGINEERING, DESIGN, AND

4 RETROFITTING OF THE ICEBREAKER MACKI5 NAW.

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than May 1, 1997, the

7 Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is
2

•HR 4081 IH

1 operating shall submit to the Committees a plan and cost

2 estimate for the engineering, design, and retrofitting of

3 the icebreaker MACKINAW (WAGB–83) to equip the ves4 sel with new engines, command and control features, hab5 itability improvements, and other features needed to allow

6 operation of the vessel by a significantly reduced crew, in7 cluding 24-hour continuous operation when necessary.

8 (b) COMMITTEES DEFINED.—In subsection (a), the

9 term ‘‘Committees’’ means the Committee on Transpor10 tation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives

11 and the Committee on Commerce of the Senate.

Æ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

Bassam Swaydan,

Plaintiff(s),

v. Case No. 2:09−cv−11760−BAF−MJH

Hon. Bernard A Friedman

Countrywide Home Loans

Servicing, LP, et al.,

Defendant(s).

NOTICE OF REMAND

TO: WAYNE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT

 Enclosed are certified copies of the Order of Remand and this Court's docket sheet.

 Please acknowledge receipt of these documents by returning a time−stamped copy of this

Notice to:

Clerk's Office

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan

231 W. Lafayette Blvd., 5th Floor

Detroit, MI

48226

(313) 234−5005

Certification

 I hereby certify that this Notice was electronically filed, and the parties and/or counsel of

record were served.

DAVID J. WEAVER, CLERK OF COURT

By: s/ D. Peruski 

Deputy Clerk

Dated: July 17, 2009

Case 2:09-cv-11760-BAF-MJH Document 12 Filed 07/17/2009 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE DECEMBER
31, 1997 HISTORICAL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                              26
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 4,926
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   4,926
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,181
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            19
<OTHER-SE>                                       (274)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     4,926
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,715
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,715)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,715)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,715)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.62)<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.62)
<FN>
<F1>Represents basic EPS calculated in accordance with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 128. "Earnings per Share."
</FN>


</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

ORDER ESTABLISHING TRIAL DOCKET FOR THE MONTH OF 

 APRIL, 2010, BEFORE THE HONORABLE PATRICK J. DUGGAN*

Listed below are the cases on this Court's trial docket for the month of April, 2010.

Counsel will be notified when their case reaches No. 5. After such notice, counsel should

be prepared to begin trial any time on 48 hours notice. It is counsel's responsibility in all

cases after they have been so notified to contact my clerk, Marilyn Orem, at 234-5147, to

ascertain the status of the trial docket. Unless otherwise notified, this Court commences

trial at 8:45 a.m. PLEASE BE PROMPT!

1. 09-11949 KAID V. LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE

2. 08-12960 FOR MOTOR CO. V. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

3. 09-10490 ALERIS ALUMINUM CANADA V. VALEO, INC.

4. 09-12106 WILLIAMS V. JP MORGAN MORTGAGE ACQUISITION, ET.AL

5. 09-11380 RIVIERA DISTRIBUTORS V. RDI OF MICHIGAN, LLC

6. 09-12003 TOOL-PLAS SYSTEMS V. CAMACO, LLC

7. 09-12782 HERRON V. WILSHIRE CREDIT CORP.

8. 09-11290 BRICKLAYERS PENSION TRUST V. EVERLAST MASONRY

9. 09-10860 TATANGELO V. MGM GRAND DETROIT, LLC

 

s/Patrick J. Duggan 

Patrick J. Duggan

United States District Judge

Dated: February 2, 2010

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record

on February 2, 2010, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/Marilyn Orem 

Case Manager

*PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT TRIAL WILL NOT BEGIN BEFORE THE FINAL

PRETRIAL CONFERENCE DATE.

IF THERE IS A MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT PENDING, FINAL PRETRIAL

CONFERENCE WILL BE RESCHEDULED APPROXIMATELY 7 DAYS AFTER ANY

DECISION ON SUCH MOTION.

2:09-cv-11380-PJD-RSW Doc # 61 Filed 02/02/10 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 1245
---

Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Max Weissengruber, President, and D. Brian
Robertson, Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer and Vice-President of Sales, of
Freshwater Technologies, Inc., hereby certifies, 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 Freshwater
      Technologies, Inc. for the period ended June 30, 2009 (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 Freshwater Technologies, Inc.                                                                



Dated: August 14, 2009



| | /s/ Max Weissengruber                                      
| | -----------------------------------------------------------
| | Max Weissengruber                                          
| | President and Director                                     
| | (Principal Executive Officer)                              
| |                                                            
| |                                                            
| |                                                            
| | /s/ Brian Robertson                                        
| | D. Brian Robertson                                         
| | Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer,
      Vice-President of
| | Sales and Director                                         
| | (Principal Financial Officer and Principal
      Accounting
| | 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 Freshwater
Technologies, Inc. and will be retained by Freshwater Technologies, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
**EXHIBIT 31.1**
**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**Section 302 Certification
I, Charles W. Ergen, certify that:
1.  I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of EchoStar DBS Corporation; 2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4.  The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
 a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b)  evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c)  disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and
5.  The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
 a)  all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
Date: March 29, 2005         /s/ Charles W. Ergen  Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


     We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (SEC File No. 333-59035) of CPC of America, Inc. of our
report dated June 1, 2006, relating to the financial statements, management's
assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting,
and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which
appears in this Amendment No. 4 to Form 10-K/A. In our report on the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, we disclaim an
opinion on management's assessment and on the effectiveness of CPC of America's
internal control over financial reporting.



/s/ CACCIAMATTA ACCOUNTANCY CORPORATION


Irvine, California
August 16, 2006
May 16, 1978



## 78-25 MEMORANDUM OPINION FOR THE ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS

Bureau of Prisons—Inmates— Administrative Segregation—Supplemental Views

On May 10, 1978, we responded to your request for our opinion on what procedural protections are constitutionally required in transferring inmates from the general prison population to “ administrative” segregation.1 You asked that we supplement our opinion by answering the question whether the standards that we think apply to Federal penal institutions also apply to State institutions. We conclude that the same standards would apply. The constitutional considerations involved in State prisoner transfers are the same as those in Federal prisoner transfers. However, Policy Statement No. 7400.50 applies only to Federal prisoners. Further, although we have no statistics, it is unlikely that every State has adopted provisions relating to prisoners that create constitutionally protectable liberty interests in remaining in the general prison population. Thus, the question is whether a liberty interest derives from the Constitution in the absence of such provisions. The holding of Enomoto answers this question in the affirmative. Distinguishing Meachum v. Fano and Montanye v. Haymes, the three-judge court concluded that due process safeguards are triggered when prisoners are transferred from the general prison population to maximum security. These safeguards were held to apply whether the transfer is for disciplinary or administrative reasons. In so holding, the court ruled that the due process clause, standing alone, provided the fundamental basis for its decision. 462 F. Supp., at 402. The court proceeded to note that the California regulation provided additional authority for its holding. The Supreme Court affirmed Enomoto without opinion. Thus, there is no way of determining whether the affirmance was based upon either or both of the reasons stated in the lower court’s opinion. However, we find Enomoto’s reasoning persuasive on both points and, therefore, we conclude that, even

'See opinion 78-23.

104absent provisions creating a liberty interest in remaining in the general prison population, transfers therefrom to maximum security trigger constitutional safeguards.2

L a r r y A . H a m m o n d Deputy Assistant Attorney General

Office o f Legal Counsel

2C om plete unanim ity is absent even w ithin the Suprem e C ourt on the precedential value o f sum m ary affirm ances o f decisions falling w ithin the Suprem e C o u rt’s a p pellate, as opposed to certiorari, ju risdiction. W here appeals are from three-judge court decisions, the C ourt has little choice but to affirm or reverse. (In these cases the C ourt cannot dism iss for w ant o f a substantial Federal question because to do so w ould suggest that the issue raised by the plaintiff w as w ithout m erit so as not to fall w ithin the statutory ju risd ictio n o f three-judge co u rts.) N evertheless, an affirm ance m akes the low er court decision the “ law o f the lan d ” until such tim e as the Suprem e C ourt speaks again on the question.

105
| 1. | Such      amended Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period      ending August 31, 2009, 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 such amended Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for      the period ending August 31, 2009, fairly presents, in all      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of      Mass      Hysteria Entertainment Company,Inc. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                   |                                                                                                                                                      |
|----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                   |                                                                                                                                                      |
| Dated: November      4, 2009 | By: /s/ Daniel      Grodnik                      |
|                                   | Daniel      GrodnikChief      Executive Officer and Principal Accounting  Officer                                                                    |
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

GHAZI MANNI et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 09-20192

Honorable Julian Abele Cook, Jr.

ORDER

Ghazi Manni, who is one of eight persons identified as Defendants in this criminal action,

is charged with (1) one count of conspiring to influence sporting contests by bribery, 18 U.S.C. §

224(a), and (2) nineteen counts of an unlawful use of a facility in interstate commerce, 18 U.S.C.

§ 1952. 

Currently before the Court is Manni’s motion for the appointment of a secondary counsel

whom he seeks to assist his retained counsel in the defense pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act,

18 U.S.C. § 3006A.

In support of his request, Manni submits that a tremendous amount of time, effort, and

technical assistance will be required to adequately prepare for and to conduct the trial in this case.

He notes that (1) the twenty-nine page indictment includes twenty counts against him, and (2) in

the course of the Government’s three-year investigation of this case, hundreds of telephone calls

were intercepted pursuant to a Title III wiretap. He also states that discovery in this case exceeds

a thousand pages of documents. Although Manni has retained his current counsel, he states - and
2

has submitted a financial affidavit to demonstrate - that he lacks the financial means with which

to pay for a second attorney whose services will be needed.

The Court concludes that, pursuant to 7A Guide to Judiciary Policy: Defender Services §

230.53.20, the appointment of a secondary counsel (1) is necessary under the circumstances of this

case, and (2) would be in the interest of justice in this difficult case. Accordingly, the Court

appoints Kimberly W. Stout as the secondary counsel to assist in Manni’s defense.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 S/Julian Abele Cook 

JULIAN ABELE COOK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: August 20, 2012

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record and/or pro

se parties on this date, August 20, 2012, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

 S/Lisa Wagner for KaMyra Doaks 

Case Manager and Deputy Clerk

(313) 234-5100
<PAGE>   1

                                   Exhibit 21
                                   ----------

                         Subsidiaries of the Registrant
                         ------------------------------


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

--------------------------------       ----------------------       -------------------------------
NAME OF SUBSIDIARY                     STATE OF ORGANIZATION        NAMES USED TO TRANSACT BUSINESS
--------------------------------       ----------------------       -------------------------------
<S>                                    <C>                          <C>

Buford Bros., Inc.                           Tennessee               Industrial Distribution Group
--------------------------------       ----------------------       -------------------------------

Cardinal Machinery, Inc.                     Tennessee               Industrial Distribution Group
--------------------------------       ----------------------       -------------------------------

E.C. Blackstone Company                       Georgia                Industrial Distribution Group
--------------------------------       ----------------------       -------------------------------

IDG-Mexico, Inc.                              Georgia                             N/A
--------------------------------       ----------------------       -------------------------------

IDG USA, LLC                                  Georgia                Boring-Smith
                                                                     Dixie Industrial
                                                                     Industrial Distribution Group
                                                                     Industrial Distribution Group -
                                                                       New England
--------------------------------       ----------------------       -------------------------------
The New England Group Industrial           New Hampshire             Industrial Distribution Group
Distributors, Inc.
--------------------------------       ----------------------       -------------------------------

</TABLE>
2:09-cv-11513-PDB-RSW Doc # 7 Filed 01/30/12 Pg 1 of 16 Pg ID 146
2:09-cv-11513-PDB-RSW Doc # 7 Filed 01/30/12 Pg 2 of 16 Pg ID 147
2:09-cv-11513-PDB-RSW Doc # 7 Filed 01/30/12 Pg 3 of 16 Pg ID 148
2:09-cv-11513-PDB-RSW Doc # 7 Filed 01/30/12 Pg 4 of 16 Pg ID 149
2:09-cv-11513-PDB-RSW Doc # 7 Filed 01/30/12 Pg 5 of 16 Pg ID 150
2:09-cv-11513-PDB-RSW Doc # 7 Filed 01/30/12 Pg 6 of 16 Pg ID 151
2:09-cv-11513-PDB-RSW Doc # 7 Filed 01/30/12 Pg 7 of 16 Pg ID 152
2:09-cv-11513-PDB-RSW Doc # 7 Filed 01/30/12 Pg 8 of 16 Pg ID 153
2:09-cv-11513-PDB-RSW Doc # 7 Filed 01/30/12 Pg 9 of 16 Pg ID 154
2:09-cv-11513-PDB-RSW Doc # 7 Filed 01/30/12 Pg 10 of 16 Pg ID 155
2:09-cv-11513-PDB-RSW Doc # 7 Filed 01/30/12 Pg 11 of 16 Pg ID 156
2:09-cv-11513-PDB-RSW Doc # 7 Filed 01/30/12 Pg 12 of 16 Pg ID 157
2:09-cv-11513-PDB-RSW Doc # 7 Filed 01/30/12 Pg 13 of 16 Pg ID 158
2:09-cv-11513-PDB-RSW Doc # 7 Filed 01/30/12 Pg 14 of 16 Pg ID 159
2:09-cv-11513-PDB-RSW Doc # 7 Filed 01/30/12 Pg 15 of 16 Pg ID 160
2:09-cv-11513-PDB-RSW Doc # 7 Filed 01/30/12 Pg 16 of 16 Pg ID 161