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

Calendar No. 588

107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 1870

[Report No. 107–271]

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 7, 2002

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural

Resources

SEPTEMBER 11, 2002

Reported by Mr. BINGAMAN, without amendment

AN ACT

To provide for the sale of certain real property within the

Newlands Project in Nevada, to the city of Fallon, Nevada.

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 ‘‘Fallon Rail Freight

5 Loading Facility Transfer Act’’.

6 SEC. 2. CONVEYANCE TO THE CITY OF FALLON, NEVADA.

7 (a) CONVEYANCE.—
2

HR 1870 RS

1 (1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subsections (b)

2 and (c), the Secretary of the Interior shall convey to

3 the city of Fallon, Nevada, all right, title, and inter4 est of the United States in and to approximately 6.3

5 acres of real property in the Newlands Reclamation

6 Project, Nevada, generally known as ‘‘380 North

7 Taylor Street, Fallon, Nevada’’, and identified for

8 disposition on the map entitled ‘‘Fallon Rail Freight

9 Loading Facility’’.

10 (2) MAP.—The map referred to in paragraph

11 (1) shall be on file and available for public inspec12 tion in—

13 (A) the offices of the Commissioner of the

14 Bureau of Reclamation; and

15 (B) the offices of the Area Manager of the

16 Bureau of Reclamation, Carson City, Nevada.

17 (b) CONSIDERATION.—

18 (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall require

19 that, as consideration for the conveyance under sub20 section (a), the city of Fallon, Nevada, shall pay to

21 the United States an amount equal to the fair mar22 ket value of the real property, as determined—

23 (A) by an appraisal of the real property,

24 conducted not later than 60 days after the date

25 of enactment of this Act by an independent ap-
3

HR 1870 RS

1 praiser approved by the Commissioner of Rec2 lamation and paid for by the city of Fallon, Ne3 vada; and

4 (B) without taking into consideration the

5 value of any structures or improvements on the

6 property.

7 (2) CREDIT OF PROCEEDS.—The amount paid

8 to the United States under paragraph (1) shall be

9 credited, in accordance with section 204(c) of the

10 Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of

11 1949 (40 U.S.C. 485(c)), to the appropriate fund in

12 the Treasury relating to the Newlands Reclamation

13 Project, Nevada.

14 (c) LIABILITY.—The conveyance under subsection (a)

15 shall not occur until such data as the Commissioner of

16 Reclamation certifies that all liability issues relating to the

17 property (including issues of environmental liability) have

18 been resolved.

Passed the House of Representatives March 6,

2002.

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL,

Clerk.
Calendar No. 588

107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 1870

[Report No. 107–271]

AN ACT

To provide for the sale of certain real property

within the Newlands Project in Nevada, to thecity of Fallon, Nevada.

SEPTEMBER 11, 2002

Reported without amendment
#### Julian M. GOODWIN, Appellant, v. Virginia Baker GOODWIN, Appellee.

Supreme Court of Florida. Division A.

Jan. 21, 1955.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
---

B.3. Net Charge-offs of Non-real-estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial Banks Year
                  Estimated volume (billions of dollars)
                  Share of outstanding farm production loans (percent)Total
                  Q1
                  Q2
                  Q3
                  Q4
                  Total
                  Q1
                  Q2
                  Q3
                  Q41993
          54
          7
          16
          5
          26
          .155
          .020
          .049
          .014
          .0691994
          69
          10
          11
          15
          33
          .187
          .026
          .032
          .037
          .0821995
          51
          -2
          14
          13
          25
          .131
          -.004
          .039
          .032
          .0611996
          95
          16
          27
          24
          30
          .240
          .039
          .070
          .058
          .0711997
          93
          6
          19
          19
          50
          .230
          .014
          .049
          .045
          .1121998
          87
          4
          15
          24
          45
          .198
          .008
          .036
          .051
          .0951999
          126
          18
          37
          35
          36
          .280
          .040
          .086
          .078
          .0802000
          108
          11
          17
          34
          45
          .259
          .027
          .041
          .075
          .0982001
          308
          67
          53
          140
          48
          .656
          .142
          .118
          .294
          .1012002
          221
          40
          50
          58
          73
          .471
          .085
          .114
          .124
          .1572003
          175
          34
          35
          48
          58
          .382
          .074
          .080
          .108
          .1282004
          n.a.
          28
          n.a.
          n.a.
          n.a.
          n.a.
          .062
          n.a.
          n.a.
          n.a. Note. Components might not sum to totals because of rounding. Reported
amounts are adjusted to exclude foreign results for large banks that
report farm net charge-offs on a consolidated basis and for small banks
that are allowed to report net charge-offs according to their internal
definition of agricultural loans. Quarterly data are as of end of quarter.
   n.a. Not available.


Statistical releases

---

Home Economic research and data  Accessibility Contact Us  Last update: June 30, 2003
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
                       
               

<MULTIPLIER>                   1000

       

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               JUL-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                  NOV-1-1996
<PERIOD-END>                    JAN-31-1997

<CASH>                                        14,746
<SECURITIES>                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 22,113
<ALLOWANCES>                                   1,090
<INVENTORY>                                   10,719
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              47,121
<PP&E>                                         5,776
<DEPRECIATION>                                 3,549
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                50,326
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         14,750
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       85
<OTHER-SE>                                     35,088
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   50,326
<SALES>                                        95,671
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               95,671
<CGS>                                          82,191
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  82,191
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               10,313
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             119
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                3,126
<INCOME-TAX>                                   1,281
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            1,845
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   1,845
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  .10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .10
        


</TABLE>
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 1 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 2 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 3 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 4 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 5 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 6 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 7 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 8 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 9 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 10 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 11 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 12 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 13 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 14 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 15 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 16 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 17 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 18 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 19 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 20 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 21 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 22 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 23 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 24 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 25 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 26 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 27 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 28 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-00391-JL Document 39 Filed 05/21/09 Page 29 of 29
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Comcast of Maine/New Hampshire, Inc.

v. Civil No. 06-cv-113-JM

Elizabeth Tulchinsky

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

In accordance with the provisions of Local Rule 41.1, as neither an agreement for

judgment nor a stipulation for dismissal has been filed, this case is herewith dismissed with 

prejudice.

SO ORDERED.

August 11, 2006 /s/ James R. Muirhead 

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

cc: John M. McLaughlin, Esq.

R. Peter Shapiro, Esq.

Elizabeth Tulchinsky , pro se

Case 1:06-cv-00113-JM Document 8 Filed 08/11/06 Page 1 of 1
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

March 29, 2016

a0321 

# Order

Clerk March 29, 2016

151577

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 151577

COA: 324220

Wayne CC: 13

- 011035

- FC

DESHAWN LEE STARKS,

Defendant

- Appellant,

_________________________________________/

On order of the C ourt, the application for leave to appeal the March 19, 2015 order

of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of

granting leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Wayne Circuit Court to determine

whether the court would have imposed a materially different sentence under the

sentencing procedure described in People v Lockridge , 498 Mich 358 (2015). On

remand, the trial court shall follow the procedure described in Part VI of our opinion. If

the trial court determines that it would not have imposed the same sentence absen t the

unconstitutional constraint on its discretion, it shall resentence the defendant. We leave

intact the remand ordered by the Court of Appeals. With regard to the defendant’s

challenge to costs, leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the

question presented should be reviewed by this Court prior to the completion of the

proceedings ordered by the Court of Appeals. In all other respects, leave to appeal is

DENIED because we are not persuaded that the remaining question presented s hould be

reviewed by this Court.

We do not retain jurisdiction.
Exhibit 32.2

                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 Meditech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the "Company") Annual
Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended May 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I Steven
I. Kern, President and 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 the best of 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.





By:  /s/  STEVEN I. KERN
   -------------------------------
          STEVEN I. KERN
          Director


August 27, 2004
<TABLE> <S> <C>




<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF OCTOBER 31, 1997 AND THE RELATED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND NOTES THERETO.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1997
<CASH>                                             100
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   45,031
<ALLOWANCES>                                       806
<INVENTORY>                                    200,420
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               245,836
<PP&E>                                          42,477
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,384
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 301,674
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          178,738
<BONDS>                                         23,585
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           132
<OTHER-SE>                                      98,279
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   301,674
<SALES>                                        320,569
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               320,569
<CGS>                                          255,106
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  255,106
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                43,981
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,612
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 17,820
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,128
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             10,692
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    10,592
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .80
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        





</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

John J. Brady

v. Civil No. 08-cv-00235-JL

Applebee’s Northeast, Inc.

O R D E R

The Preliminary Pretrial Conference was held in chambers on

August 4, 2008.

The Discovery Plan (document no. 5) is approved as

submitted.

The plaintiff’s counsel intends to file a related complaint

on behalf of the plaintiff’s wife, which the parties anticipate

will be consolidated with this case.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Joseph N. Laplante

United States District Judge

Dated: August 4, 2008

cc: H. Jonathan Meyer, Esq.

Martha Van Oot, Esq.

Jill K. Blackmer, Esq.

Case 1:08-cv-00235-JL Document 7 Filed 08/04/08 Page 1 of 1
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Juan CALVILLO-REYES, aka Manuel Rodriguez-Reyes, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 02-50209.

D.C. No. CR-01-02500-NAJ.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 4, 2003.*

Decided March 12, 2003.

*344Before LAY,** HAWKINS and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

*

This panel unanimously finds this case suit*344able for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

**

 The Honorable Donald P. Lay, United States Circuit Judge for the Eighth Circuit.

MEMORANDUM ***

The government’s closing rebuttal argument was proper. The government’s statements regarding other individuals and a larger smuggling organization were based upon reasonable inferences from the evidence introduced at trial from both parties. *United, States v. Ramirez-Lopez,*315 F.3d 1143, 1156 (9th Cir.2003).

Moreover, even if we were to assume it was improper, it was not “plain” error. The cases relied on by Calvillo-Reyes involve the presentation of *expert testimony*on the structure of *drug trafficking organizations;*1 no case has yet applied this rationale to the alien-smuggling context, nor has any case suggested that the prosecution cannot allude to a larger organization in closing argument if the evidence supports such an argument.

We also cannot say that the government’s argument prejudiced CalvilloReyes. Nothing about the government’s argument contradicted Calvillo-Reyes’s theory of defense (that he was an unknowing pawn who had been duped by his female passenger); the jury heard Calvillo-Reyes’s explanation and obviously rejected it. There was also substantial circumstantial evidence of Calvillo-Reyes’s guilt, including the numerous lies he offered to officials at the port of entry, the implausibilty of much of his testimony, and the extreme unlikelihood a driver of a vehicle with a three-gallon gas tank, reeking of gas fumes, would not know that the vehicle had been altered. Any error did not affect Calvillo-Reyes’s substantial rights. *Johnson v. United States,*520 U.S. 461, 467, 117 S.Ct. 1544, 137 L.Ed.2d 718 (1997).

AFFIRMED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

1

. *United States v. Pineda-Torres,*287 F.3d 860 (9th Cir.2002); *United States v. Varela-Rivera,*279 F.3d 1174 (9th Cir.2002); *United States v. McGowan,*274 F.3d 1251 (9th Cir.2001); and *United States v. Vallejo,*237 F.3d 1008 (9th Cir.2001), *amended by*246 F.3d 1150 (9th Cir.2001).
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Al Grimes, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.

[807 NYS2d 487]

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed March 21, 2005, which, among other things, ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board finding that claimant voluntarily left his employment as a rebuilder of transmissions without good cause. Testimony at the hearing established that when the general manager confronted claimant about a mistake in his *1050work and sent him home for the day, claimant said that if he left he would not return. The general manager responded by stating that was claimant’s choice. Claimant left and failed to return to work thereafter. Under these circumstances, we find no reason to disturb the Board’s decision. Although claimant testified that he was fired, this created a credibility issue for the Board to resolve *(see Matter of Mesidor [Sweeney],*247 AD2d 696 [1998]; *Matter of McKeown [Sweeney],*233 AD2d 744 [1996]). Furthermore, we find no reason to disturb the Board’s finding that claimant made willful false statements to obtain benefits. Claimant’s remaining contentions, including his challenge to a coworker testifying via telephone, have been reviewed and found to be without merit.

Mercure, J.P., Peters, Rose, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

MOHAMMED NAZIR BIN LEP,

Petitioner,

v. Civil Action No. 09-0031 (JDB)

BARACK OBAMA, et al.,

 Respondents.

ORDER GRANTING STAY OF CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE

Upon consideration of [86] Petitioner's Unopposed Motion to Continue the Stay of

Deadlines Established in the Case Management Order, and finding good cause therefor, it is

hereby

ORDERED that said motion is granted and that the deadlines established in the Case

Management Order filed April 30, 2010 ("CMO") are stayed; it is

FURTHER ORDERED that by no later than February 1, 2013, Petitioner shall submit to

the Court a proposed schedule to govern further proceedings in this case and/or a joint status

report on the scheduling of further proceedings in this case; it is 

FURTHER ORDERED that during the pendency of this stay, Petitioner may confer with

Respondents regarding potential discovery pursuant to CMO § I.E.2 or, if necessary, file a single

I.E.2 motion on a schedule to be proposed at the time the motion, if any, is filed; and it is

FURTHER ORDERED that aside from the stay of the deadlines in the CMO, all other

aspects of the CMO shall remain in full force and effect.

SO ORDERED.

 /s/ 

 JOHN D. BATES

 United States District Judge

Dated: December 6, 2012
Exhibit 32


  Written Statement of the President and Chief Executive and Financial Officer
                          Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, I, the undersigned
President and Chief Executive and Financial Officer of Avenue Entertainment
Group, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended June 30,
2003 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.



                                                              Cary Brokaw
August 14, 2003