alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 06-cr-229-PB

Scott McLain

O R D E R

The defendant, through counsel, has moved to continue the

May 1, 2007 trial in the above case, citing the need for

additional time to negotiate a plea agreement or prepare a

defense. The government does not object to a continuance of the

trial date.

Accordingly, for the above reasons and to allow the parties

additional time to properly prepare for trial, the court will

continue the trial from May 1, 2007 to July 10, 2007. In

agreeing to continue the trial, the court finds pursuant to 18

U.S.C.A. § 3161(h)(8)(A) that for the above-stated reasons, the

ends of justice served in granting a continuance outweigh the

best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

Case 1:06-cr-00229-PB Document 11 Filed 04/19/07 Page 1 of 2
2

The April 19, 2007 final pretrial conference is continued to

June 26, 2007 at 3:45 p.m.

SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro 

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

April 19, 2007

cc: Jonathan Saxe, Esq.

Peter Papps, Esq.

United States Probation

United States Marshal

Case 1:06-cr-00229-PB Document 11 Filed 04/19/07 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Greg Schillinger

v. 05-cv-459-JD

Northern NH Correctional Facility

O R D E R

I herewith approve the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge

Muirhead dated March 17, 2006, no objection having been filed and for the

reasons stated therein. This case is hereby Dismissed. Clerk to close the case.

SO ORDERED.

April 10, 2006 /s/Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr. 

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

United States District Judge

cc: Greg Schillinger, pro se

Andrew B. Livernois, Esq.

Case 1:05-cv-00459-JD Document 26 Filed 04/10/06 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

 v. Case No. 07-cr-130-04-SM

Jay Lawrence

O R D E R

Defendant Lawrence's assented-to motion to continue the trial (document no. 52)

is granted. Trial has been rescheduled for the February 2008 trial period. Defendant

shall file a Waiver of Speedy Trial Rights not later than January 3, 2008. On the filing

of the waivers, his continuance shall be effective.

The court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance outweigh

the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, 18 U.S.C. §

3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would unreasonably deny the

defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation taking into account

Case 1:07-cr-00130-SM Document 53 Filed 12/18/07 Page 1 of 2
2

the exercise of due diligence under the circumstances.

Final Pretrial Conference: January 31, 2008 at 4:30 PM

Jury Selection: February 5, 2008 at 9:30 AM

SO ORDERED.

December 18, 2007 _________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

cc: Terry Ollila, Esq.

 Liam D. Scully, Esq.

 Mark Sisti, Esq.

 Paul Garrity, Esq.

 Sven Wiberg, Esq.

 U. S. Probation

 U. S. Marshal

Case 1:07-cr-00130-SM Document 53 Filed 12/18/07 Page 2 of 2
|   | 1. | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended April 3, 2011 (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 780(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. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|        |        |   |   |                                                                               |
|-------------|-------------|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|        |        |   |   |                                                                               |
|  Date: | May 9, 2011 |   | By:    | /s/ RONALD J. BUSCHUR                                                              |
|        |        |   |   | Ronald J. BuschurPresident and Chief Executive OfficerPowerwave Technologies, Inc. |
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 24, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 55054]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-22348]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Air Force


Air Force Real Property Agency; Exchange of Air Force Real 
Property for Military Construction

ACTION: Notice.

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

    Authority: Title 10, United States Code, Section 2869(d)(1).

SUMMARY: This Notice identifies excess Federal property under the 
administrative jurisdiction of the United States Air Force that the Air 
Force intends to exchange for military construction beneficial to the 
Air Force.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Sam Rupe, Office of the Air Force 
General Counsel (SAF/GCN-RPO), 143 Billy Mitchell Blvd., Suite 1, San 
Antonio, TX 78226-1816; telephone (210) 925-0227 (this telephone number 
is not toll-free).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2869(d)(1), the 
Air Force is publishing this Notice to identify Federal real property 
that the Air Force intends to dispose of in exchange for military 
construction beneficial to the Air Force.
    Description of the Air Force property: Buckley Annex CO.
    Property Number:
    Status: Excess.
    Comments: Buckley Annex is located on the western side of the 
former Lowry AFB and currently houses the Defense Finance and 
Accounting Service (DFAS) and the Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC). 
In 2005, BRAC legislation directed the relocation of ARPC to Buckley 
AFB and the realignment of DFAS, resulting in the ultimate closure of 
the site. The approximate 70 acre parcel contains one 605,000 Square 
Foot building and several smaller buildings to include a warehouse and 
office building located at 6760 E. Irvington Pl., in the City and 
County of Denver.
    Military construction sought: After completion of a competitive bid 
process, the Air Force will enter into an agreement with the selected 
offeror/property recipient to construct military construction projects. 
The specific projects that will be constructed will depend on the 
amount of construction value offered by the prospective property 
recipient.

Bao-Anh Trinh,
Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. E8-22348 Filed 9-23-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-05-P
5

A.1. Number of Non-real-estate Bank Loans Made to FarmersMillions

Size of loan Si

Purpose of loan (thousands of dollars) 

Other Farm 

current machinery 1 10 25 100

Feeder Other operating and to to to and Sm

Period Total livestock livestock expenses1 equipment Other2 9 24 99 over mid

1991...... 2.60 .35 .23 1.64 .17 .21 1.66 .51 .32 .10 1992...... 2.69 .35 .25 1.67 .18 .24 1.67 .54 .37 .11 1993...... 2.70 .36 .27 1.62 .18 .27 1.65 .56 .37 .12 1994...... 2.53 .28 .23 1.56 .18 .27 1.55 .51 .35 .12 1995...... 2.49 .26 .19 1.48 .17 .39 1.45 .57 .36 .12 1996...... 2.22 .18 .17 1.38 .14 .36 1.33 .48 .31 .11 1997...... 2.27 .19 .20 1.40 .15 .33 1.32 .50 .34 .11 1998...... 2.10 .15 .18 1.39 .17 .22 1.20 .45 .33 .12 1999...... 1.96 .14 .16 1.32 .16 .18 1.09 .44 .32 .11 2000...... 1.91 .11 .17 1.30 .13 .19 1.09 .44 .28 .10 2001...... 1.76 .13 .16 1.08 .13 .26 .97 .40 .28 .11 2002...... 1.95 .11 .15 1.34 .12 .23 1.11 .42 .31 .12 1999: Q4... 1.49 .15 .15 .88 .13 .17 .74 .36 .29 .10 2000: Q1... 1.91 .09 .16 1.36 .13 .16 1.07 .43 .27 .14  Q2... 2.27 .12 .19 1.56 .18 .22 1.28 .54 .33 .11  Q3... 1.86 .09 .15 1.29 .12 .20 1.10 .43 .26 .08  Q4... 1.59 .14 .19 .96 .11 .19 .90 .35 .26 .08 2001: Q1... 1.63 .12 .17 .97 .14 .23 .84 .37 .30 .11  Q2... 2.16 .13 .19 1.34 .16 .34 1.23 .49 .32 .12  Q3... 1.66 .09 .13 1.09 .12 .23 1.00 .36 .23 .08  Q4... 1.57 .17 .15 .92 .10 .24 .81 .38 .26 .12 2002: Q1... 1.76 .14 .16 1.10 .13 .24 .90 .39 .34 .14  Q2... 2.44 .11 .15 1.78 .13 .26 1.44 .52 .34 .14  Q3... 1.95 .07 .14 1.40 .14 .20 1.16 .40 .29 .10  Q4... 1.65 .13 .15 1.09 .07 .20 .92 .36 .28 .09 2003: Q1... 1.69 .13 .14 1.08 .16 .18 .84 .37 .33 .15  Q2... 1.81 .11 .12 1.28 .15 .15 1.08 .37 .27 .09  Note. Data are estimates from the Federal Reserve System’s Survey of the Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers. Quarterly estimates aannual rate and are based on loans made during the first full week of the second month of the quarter. 1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses and the care and feeding of livestock (including p 2. Typically loans for which the lender does not know the purpose. 3. Portfolios with $25 million or less in farm loans. 4. Portfolios with more than $25 million in farm loans.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

St. Paul’s School

 v. Civil No. 06-cv-406-JD

The Travelers Indemnity Company

O R D E R

I recuse myself from this case as Attorney Glahn is

on my recusal list.

SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

November 3, 2006

cc: Wilbur Glahn, III, Esq.

Case 1:06-cv-00406-MML Document 6 Filed 11/03/06 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

 FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE 

United States of America, Plaintiff, 

 v. Cr. No. 05-08-01-JD Tracy Sutter Petrucelli, 

Defendant, and Stonebridge Country Club, 

Garnishee. 

 

 ORDER TO QUASH WRIT OF CONTINUING GARNISHMENT

On February 23, 2012, a Writ of Continuing Garnishment and 

Clerk's Notice of Continuing Garnishment were issued in the 

above-captioned action by James R. Starr, Clerk, United States 

District Court. In accordance with the terms of the Writ of 

Garnishment, service was made upon the Garnishee, Stonebridge 

Country Club on March 6, 2012, instructing them to withhold 25% of 

the Defendant’s non-exempt disposable earnings. 

 Plaintiff and Defendant have agreed to payment of the 

restitution through a court-ordered garnishment with Jalbert & 

Company CPA’s, P.C., in this criminal case. An Assented-To Motion 

For Final Order Of Continuing Garnishment with Jalbert & Company 

CPA’s, P.C., was filed on March 8, 2012. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED 

The Writ of Continuing Garnishment issued on February 23, 2012, 

against Stonebridge Country Club, is hereby quashed pursuant to 28 
U.S.C. ' 3205(10)(A). 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 _________________________ 

 Joseph A. DiClerico 

 Senior U.S. District Court Judge 

DATED: 

cc: Michael T. McCormack, AUSA 

 Tracy Sutter Petrucelli, pro se defendant 

 Stonebridge Country Club, garnishee 

March 9, 2012 /s/Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.
17

A.12. Characteristics of Bank Loans to Farmers -- Large Farm Lenders, by Risk Rating, May 5-9, 2003Percent except as notedLoan characteristic All Minimal Low Moderate Acceptable Special Not rated Volume of loans (thousands of dollars) 590,927 37,884 61,634 214,874 155,289 47,409 46,671 Number of loans 17,598 486 2,087 7,460 4,433 895 910 Weighted average maturity (months)1 20.65 11.69 20.48 24.16 18.29 19.56 22.70 

Weighted average repricing interval (months)2 4.72 6.41 6.97 4.78 3.26 2.70 7.45 

Weighted average risk rating3 3.22 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 n.a

Weighted average interest rate 4 5.47 7.00 6.11 5.15 5.10 6.71 4.53 

 Standard error5 .23 .47 .35 .38 .42 .34 .50 

 Interquartile range6

 75th percentile 6.69 8.11 7.25 6.55 5.82 7.50 6.00  25th percentile 4.33 5.65 5.25 3.80 4.33 5.38 3.36  Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 4.78 5.62 5.95 4.25 5.26 5.14 4.23  Other livestock 4.59 4.48 5.90 4.24 4.29 3.93 7.20  Other current operating expenses7 5.96 7.41 6.19 5.88 5.37 6.71 5.00 

 Farm machinery and equipment 5.98 6.15 6.56 5.67 5.03 7.46 6.62  Farm real estate 6.13 5.84 6.56 5.87 6.47 5.11 5.88  Other8 4.77 6.03 5.83 4.64 4.67 6.16 3.65 

Share of total loan volume Features of loan Floating rates 81.46 27.04 58.07 87.27 95.38 96.36 81.26  Under commitment 85.28 90.30 77.82 78.35 91.65 92.06 94.08  Callable 22.73 23.76 41.09 27.87 8.79 7.05 .44  Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 9.81 10.01 10.31 15.76 4.65 7.44 2.81  Other livestock 7.13 6.87 10.10 7.27 10.38 .28 .92  Other current operating expenses7 44.79 81.27 56.30 37.35 45.76 33.78 41.62 

 Farm machinery and equipment 10.11 .55 .84 8.46 13.26 34.69 2.62  Farm real estate 4.05 1.14 6.49 3.63 4.30 .15 8.58  Other8 24.11 .17 15.96 27.54 21.65 23.66 43.45 

 Type of collateral Farm real estate 15.80 46.08 20.95 16.95 8.74 8.38 9.67  Other 75.47 47.13 66.72 68.96 87.89 90.88 80.65  Note. Most large farm lenders that reported loans to farmers had more than $25 million in farm loans. For explanation of footnotes, see table A.8. n.a. Not available.
16

A.11. Characteristics of Bank Loans to Farmers -- All Banks, by Risk Rating, August 1-5, 2005Percent except as notedLoan characteristic All Minimal Low Moderate Acceptable Special Not ratVolume of loans (thousands of dollars) 1,293,796 67,728 122,717 679,772 281,279 15,897 43,02Number of loans 31,569 1,817 5,260 14,088 5,207 821 1,60Weighted average maturity (months)1 24.14 93.73 21.32 21.33 10.31 10.28 76.

Weighted average repricing interval (months)2 6.98 8.28 11.55 7.26 .58 4.30 30.2

Weighted average risk rating3 3.05 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 n

Weighted average interest rate4 6.77 7.25 7.22 6.55 6.68 7.90 7.7 Standard error5 .22 .58 .15 .28 .26 .31 .

 Interquartile range6 75th percentile 7.60 8.03 8.50 7.59 7.23 8.56 7.9 25th percentile 6.13 6.52 6.29 5.64 6.17 6.96 7.4 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 7.00 7.23 6.22 6.64 6.45 7.79 8. Other livestock 6.83 6.42 7.25 6.94 6.24 8.43 7.5 Other current operating expenses7 7.11 7.27 7.44 6.95 7.01 8.04 7.7

 Farm machinery and equipment 6.93 n.a. 8.39 6.84 6.75 7.47 7. Farm real estate 7.15 4.75 6.90 7.19 6.99 n.a. 7.5 Other8 5.89 7.71 6.22 5.32 6.27 7.52 7.9

Share of total loan volume Features of loan Floating rates 74.26 51.66 43.07 77.77 94.14 75.60 32.7 Under commitment 74.60 60.20 76.57 75.99 93.54 79.71 19.9 Callable 20.75 25.11 26.94 21.89 6.33 11.61 25.5 Subject to prepayment penalty 2.39 4.60 n.a. 3.54 .14 1.51 n Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 5.87 11.27 11.91 2.43 3.00 .10 6.4 Other livestock 9.12 8.65 6.08 11.42 7.75 2.25 3. Other current operating expenses7 38.46 41.53 60.56 34.53 38.40 69.89 37.4 Farm machinery and equipment 15.13 n.a. 7.42 16.22 22.93 2.51 11.7 Farm real estate 8.00 3.73 5.92 10.62 2.32 n.a. 32. Other8 23.42 34.82 8.11 24.78 25.60 25.26 7.

 Type of collateral Farm real estate 12.41 34.35 12.33 11.46 4.90 12.80 38. Other 83.50 64.41 83.39 85.26 88.55 87.16 61.4 For explanation of footnotes, see table A.8. n.a. Not available.
H. R. 146

One Hundred Seventh Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE FIRST SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,

the third day of January, two thousand and one

An Act

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to study the suitability and feasibility

of designating the Great Falls Historic District in Paterson, New Jersey, as

a unit of the National Park System, 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 ‘‘Great Falls Historic District

Study Act of 2001’’.

SEC. 2. NATIONAL PARK SERVICE STUDY REGARDING GREAT FALLS

HISTORIC DISTRICT, PATERSON, NEW JERSEY.

(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section:

(1) GREAT FALLS HISTORIC DISTRICT.—The term ‘‘Great Falls

Historic District’’ means the Great Falls Historic District in

the city of Paterson, New Jersey, established as an historic

district by section 510 of the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands

Management Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–333; 110 Stat. 4158;

16 U.S.C. 461 note).

(2) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary

of the Interior, acting through the Director of the National

Park Service.

(b) STUDY.—As soon as practicable after funds are made available to carry out this section, the Secretary shall commence a

study regarding the suitability and feasibility of further recognizing

the historic and cultural significance of the lands and structures

of the Great Falls Historic District through the designation of

the Great Falls Historic District as a unit of the National Park

System.

(c) STUDY PROCESS AND COMPLETION.—Section 8(c) of Public

Law 91–383 (16 U.S.C. 1a–5(c)) shall apply to the study required

by this section.

(d) SUBMISSION.—The Secretary shall submit to the Committee

on Resources of the House of Representatives and the Committee

on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate a report describing

the results of the study.
H. R. 146—2

(e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized

to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out this

section.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
I 

★

107TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1619

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the limitation 

on capital losses applicable to individuals. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 26, 2001

Ms. LOFGREN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase 

the limitation on capital losses applicable to individuals.

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

3 SECTION 1. INCREASE IN LIMITATION ON CAPITAL LOSSES 

4 APPLICABLE TO INDIVIDUALS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) of section 1211(b) 

6 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to limita7 tion on capital losses for taxpayers other than corpora8 tions) is amended by striking ‘‘$3,000 ($1,500’’ and in9 serting ‘‘$8,250 ($4,125’’. 
2

HR 1619 IH1S 

1 (b) ADJUSTMENT FOR INFLATION.—Section 1211 of 

2 such Code (relating to limitation on capital losses) is 

3 amended by adding at the end the following new sub4 section: 

5 ‘‘(c) ADJUSTMENT FOR INFLATION.—

6 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—In the case of any taxable 

7 year beginning in a calendar year after 2001, the 

8 $8,250 and $4,125 amounts contained in subsection 

9 (b)(1) shall each be increased by an amount equal 

10 to—

11 ‘‘(i) such amount, multiplied by 

12 ‘‘(ii) the cost-of-living adjustment de13 termined under section 1(f)(3) for the cal14 endar year in which the taxable year be15 gins by substituting ‘calendar year 2000’ 

16 for ‘calendar year 1992’ in subparagraph 

17 (B) thereof. 

18 ‘‘(B) ROUNDING.—If any increase deter19 mined under paragraph (1) is not a multiple of 

20 $5, such increase shall be rounded to the next 

21 highest multiple of $5.’’. 

22 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

23 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

24 December 31, 2000.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                       1,861,889
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               11,172,574
<ALLOWANCES>                                 5,730,151
<INVENTORY>                                    685,027
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             8,376,710
<PP&E>                                         687,826
<DEPRECIATION>                                 111,208
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,953,328
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,439,200
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        4,813,614
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           389
<OTHER-SE>                                  (1,299,875)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,953,328
<SALES>                                     15,474,034
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            15,474,034
<CGS>                                        1,081,679
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               16,497,725
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,487
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,005,511)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,045
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,006,556)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.40)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Anthony Thomas, Appellant.

[808 NYS2d 644]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (John A.K. Bradley, J.), rendered June 30, 2004, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds and resisting arrest, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to an aggregate term of *A1!2*to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The Feople made a sufficiently particularized showing of an overriding interest justifying closure of the courtroom during the undercover officer’s testimony *(see e.g. People v Lopez,*18 AD3d 233 [2005], *lv denied*5 NY3d 807 [2005]). The officer testified that although he was on restricted duty due to an *347injury, he planned, upon his recovery, to resume undercover work in the specific area of defendant’s arrest. He also testified that unapprehended subjects remained at large and that he feared for his safety. Furthermore, the court properly permitted the officer to testify anonymously based on this same showing *(see People v Waver,*3 NY3d 748 [2004]). Concur—Buckley, P.J., Friedman, Marlow, Sullivan and Malone, JJ.