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-226-PB

Beth Handy, et al.

O R D E R

The defendant, through counsel, has moved to continue the

January 8, 2007 trial in the above case, citing the need for

additional time to complete additional discovery based on the

superseding indictment in this case. The government and codefendants do not object to a continuance of the trial date.

Accordingly, for the above reason and to allow the parties

additional time to properly prepare for trial, the court will

continue the trial from January 8, 2008 to April 1, 2008. 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 defendants in a speedy trial

Case 1:06-cr-00226-PB Document 86 Filed 11/29/07 Page 1 of 2
2

The December 19, 2007 final pretrial conference is continued

to March 27, 2008 at 4:15 p.m.

SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro 

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

November 29, 2007

cc: Bjorn Lange, Esq.

Mark Irish, AUSA

Michael Iacopino, Esq.

David Bownes, Esq.

Dana Cole, Esq.

Richard Johnston, Esq.

United States Probation

United States Marshal

Case 1:06-cr-00226-PB Document 86 Filed 11/29/07 Page 2 of 2
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 26 (Thursday, February 7, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7359-7360]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-2271]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 6073]


U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy; Notice of Meeting

    The U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy will hold a public 
meeting on February 21, 2008, in Room 602 (Lindner Family Commons) at 
the Elliot School of International Affairs, George Washington 
University, 1957 E Street NW., Washington, DC. The meeting will be held 
from 9 a.m. to 12 noon. The Commissioners will discuss public diplomacy 
issues, including the application of political communication theory, 
and associated disciplines, in U.S. government public diplomacy 
efforts.
    The Advisory Commission was originally established under 604 of the 
United States Information and Exchange Act of 1948, as amended (22 
U.S.C. 1469) and section 8 of Reorganization Plan Numbered 2 of 1977. 
It was reauthorized pursuant to Public Law 110-21 (2007). The 
Commission is a bipartisan panel created by Congress in 1948 to assess 
public diplomacy policies and programs of the U.S. government and 
publicly funded

[[Page 7360]]

nongovernmental organizations. The Commission reports its findings and 
recommendations to the President, the Congress and the Secretary of 
State and the American people. Current Commission members include 
Barbara M. Barrett of Arizona, who is the Chairman; Harold Pachios of 
Maine; Ambassador Penne Percy Korth of Washington, DC.; Ambassador 
Elizabeth Bagley of Washington, DC.; Jay T. Snyder of New York; and 
Maria Sophia Aguirre of Washington, DC.
    Seating at this meeting is limited. To attend and for more 
information, please contact Carl Chan at (202) 203-7883. E-mail: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#45262d242b262e0536312431206b222a33"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f2919a939c9199b28186938697dc959d84">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: January 31, 2008.
Carl Chan,
Interim Executive Director, ACPD, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E8-2271 Filed 2-6-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-11-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Gerard Joseph Bean

v. Civil No. 07-cv-328-JL

Warden, Northern New Hampshire

Correctional Facility

O R D E R

Pro se petitioner Gerard Joseph Bean has filed a “motion to

add” (document no. 28). To the extent he seeks to amend his

petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 2254, I grant his motion. 

Also filed is a “motion to postpone ruling” with regard to

Bean’s habeas corpus petition (document no. 29). To the extent

he requests additional time in which to further amend his habeas

corpus petition, I grant his motion. He is ordered to file an

amendment within thirty (30) days from the date of this order.

To the extent Bean seeks a stay of proceedings and requests

the court to hold his habeas corpus petition in abeyance pending

his exhaustion of state remedies, he must notify the court in

Case 1:07-cv-00328-JL Document 30 Filed 07/23/08 Page 1 of 2
2

writing and specifically request a stay of proceedings. 

SO ORDERED.

____________________________________

James R. Muirhead 

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: July 23, 2008

cc: Gerard Joseph Bean, pro se

Case 1:07-cv-00328-JL Document 30 Filed 07/23/08 Page 2 of 2
B.6. Distribution of Agricultural Banks by the Share of Their Total Loans that are Nonperforming

Percent

Less than 20.0 percent

2.0 2.0-4.9 5.0-9.9 10.0-14.9 15.0-19.9 and

Period Total percent percent percent percent percent over

1995...... 100.0 83.4 14.0 2.1 .3 .1 .1

1996...... 100.0 81.9 15.4 2.3 .2 .1 .1

1997...... 100.0 84.5 12.9 2.5 .1 .1 .0

1998...... 100.0 81.7 15.1 2.8 .3 ... .1

1999...... 100.0 84.8 12.6 2.4 .3 .0 ...

2000...... 100.0 85.0 12.8 1.8 .3 ... ...

2001...... 100.0 80.0 17.3 2.5 .1 .0 ...

2002...... 100.0 79.7 17.1 2.8 .2 .1 ...

2003...... 100.0 81.2 15.0 3.3 .4 .1 .0

2004...... 100.0 85.3 12.7 1.7 .2 .1 ...

2005...... 100.0 87.2 10.7 1.9 .2 ... ...

2006...... 100.0 86.8 11.5 1.6 .0 .0 ...

 Q4... 100.0 84.5 12.9 2.5 .1 .1 .0

1998: Q1... 100.0 80.6 16.3 2.8 .1 .1 .1

 Q2... 100.0 80.8 15.9 2.9 .3 .1 .0

 Q3... 100.0 80.3 16.2 3.1 .3 .1 .0

 Q4... 100.0 81.7 15.1 2.8 .3 ... .1

1999: Q1... 100.0 77.2 17.8 4.5 .5 .0 .0

 Q2... 100.0 78.7 16.9 3.8 .6 ... ...

 Q3... 100.0 80.4 15.9 3.4 .3 .0 ...

 Q4... 100.0 84.8 12.6 2.4 .3 .0 ...

2000: Q1... 100.0 81.8 14.8 2.9 .5 .0 ...

 Q2... 100.0 82.2 15.1 2.4 .3 .0 .0

 Q3... 100.0 83.0 14.9 1.7 .4 .0 ...

 Q4... 100.0 85.0 12.8 1.8 .3 ... ...

2001: Q1... 100.0 80.3 16.9 2.6 .2 .1 ...

 Q2... 100.0 80.2 16.6 3.0 .2 .1 ...

 Q3... 100.0 78.7 17.8 3.2 .3 ... ...

 Q4... 100.0 80.0 17.3 2.5 .1 .0 ...

2002: Q1... 100.0 76.8 19.3 3.7 .2 .0 ...

 Q2... 100.0 76.8 19.6 3.1 .4 .0 ...

 Q3... 100.0 77.8 18.8 3.2 .2 .0 ...

 Q4... 100.0 79.7 17.1 2.8 .2 .1 ...

2003: Q1... 100.0 75.4 19.9 4.1 .3 .2 .0

 Q2... 100.0 76.2 19.2 4.0 .4 .1 .1

 Q3... 100.0 77.7 18.3 3.6 .3 .1 .0

 Q4... 100.0 81.2 15.0 3.3 .4 .1 .0

2004: Q1... 100.0 79.2 17.2 3.2 .2 .1 .0

 Q2... 100.0 81.3 15.1 3.2 .3 .0 .1

 Q3... 100.0 82.1 15.1 2.4 .2 .1 .0

 Q4... 100.0 85.3 12.7 1.7 .2 .1 ...

2005: Q1... 100.0 84.4 13.3 2.0 .2 .0 ...

 Q2... 100.0 85.7 12.0 2.0 .3 .0 ...

 Q3... 100.0 85.7 12.4 1.8 .1 ... ...

 Q4... 100.0 87.2 10.7 1.9 .2 ... ...

2006: Q1... 100.0 85.6 12.6 1.7 .1 ... ...

 Q2... 100.0 85.8 12.5 1.5 .1 .0 ...

 Q3... 100.0 85.9 12.5 1.5 .0 ... ...

 Q4... 100.0 86.8 11.5 1.6 .0 .0 ...

 Note. Nonperforming loans are loans in nonaccruing status or past due 90 days or more. Renegotiated or restructured

loans in compliance with the modified terms are not included. Agricultural banks are defined in the introduction to section B.

Yearly data are as of December 31. Quarterly data are as of end of quarter.

 ... Not applicable.

26
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 24, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 55137]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-22403]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-63,713]


Canterbury Printing Company of Rome Incorporated, Rome, NY; 
Notice of Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for 
Reconsideration

    On September 11, 2008, the Department of Labor (Department) 
received a request for administrative reconsideration of the 
Department's Notice of negative determination regarding workers' 
eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and 
Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA) applicable to workers 
and former workers of the subject firm. The negative determination was 
issued on July 28, 2008. The Department's Notice of determination was 
published in the Federal Register on August 12, 2008 (73 FR 46924). 
Workers produce printed materials including postcards, calendars, and 
journals.
    The negative determination was based on the Department's findings 
that the subject firm did not import printed materials or shift 
production of those articles to a foreign country during the relevant 
period. The Department's survey of the subject firm's major declining 
customer revealed no increased imports of postcards, calendars and 
journals during the relevant period.
    In the request for reconsideration, the Graphic Communications 
Conference of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters Union, Local 
503-M (Union) stated that the ``import of foreign printed products put 
a severe economic strain on Canterbury Press, which forced the company 
to close.''
    The Department has carefully reviewed the Union's request for 
reconsideration and has determined that the Department will conduct 
further investigation.

Conclusion

    After careful review of the application, I conclude that the claim 
is of sufficient weight to justify reconsideration of the U.S. 
Department of Labor's prior decision. The application is, therefore, 
granted.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 17th day of September 2008.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
 [FR Doc. E8-22403 Filed 9-23-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Barbara Ann Haines,

Plaintiff

v. Case No. 08-cv-505-SM

N.H. Department of Health and

Human Services, Division for 

Children, Youth and Families,

Defendant

O R D E R

I herewith approve the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge

Muirhead dated February 19, 2009, no objection having been filed for the reasons

set forth therein. Plaintiff’s (third) Motion to Amend Complaint and Relief (doc.

no. 7) is also denied. Plaintiff's complaint is hereby dismissed.

SO ORDERED.

May 11, 2009 _________________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

cc: Barbara Haines, pro se

Case 1:08-cv-00505-SM Document 8 Filed 05/11/09 Page 1 of 1
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2061 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2061

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To amend the charter of Southeastern University of the District of 
                               Columbia.

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

SECTION 1. AMENDMENTS TO CHARTER OF SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY REGARDING 
              BOARD OF TRUSTEES.

    Section 3 of the Act entitled ``An Act for the relief of the 
Southeastern University of the Young Men's Christian Association of the 
District of Columbia'', approved August 19, 1937 (50 Stat. 697), as 
amended by section 1 of the Act entitled ``An Act to amend the charter 
of Southeastern University of the District of Columbia'', approved 
October 10, 1966 (80 Stat. 883), is amended--
            (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``, one-third of 
        whom'' and all that follows and inserting a period; and
            (2) in the second sentence, by striking ``elected for a 
        term'' and inserting ``elected by the board for a term''.

SEC. 2. TREATMENT OF CURRENT TRUSTEES.

    The amendment made by section 1 shall not affect the term of office 
of any individual serving on the Board of Trustees of Southeastern 
University as of the date of the enactment of this Act.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 20, 2001.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
107th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 2061

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

  To amend the charter of Southeastern University of the District of 
                               Columbia.
```
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 19

To nullify the effect of certain provisions of various Executive orders.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 3, 2001

Mr. BARR of Georgia introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on International Relations

A BILL

To nullify the effect of certain provisions of various Executive

orders.

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 ‘‘Terrorist Elimination

5 Act of 2001’’.

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

7 Congress finds that—

8 (1) past Presidents have issued Executive or9 ders which severely limit the use of the military

10 when dealing with potential threats against the

11 United States of America;
2

•HR 19 IH

1 (2) these Executive orders limit the swift, sure,

2 and precise action needed by the United States to

3 protect our national security;

4 (3) present strategy allows the military forces

5 to bomb large targets hoping to eliminate a terrorist

6 leader, but prevents our country from designing a

7 limited action which would specifically accomplish

8 that purpose;

9 (4) on several occasions the military has been

10 ordered to use a military strike hoping, in most

11 cases unsuccessfully, to remove a terrorist leader

12 who has committed crimes against the United State;

13 (5) as the threat from terrorism grows, America

14 must continue to investigate effective ways to com15 bat the menace posed by those who would murder

16 American citizens simply to make a political point;

17 and

18 (6) actions by the United States Government to

19 remove such persons is a remedy which should be

20 used sparingly and considered only after all other

21 reasonable options have failed or are not available;

22 however, this is an option our country must main23 tain for cases in which international threats cannot

24 be eliminated by other means.
3

•HR 19 IH

1 SEC. 3. NULLIFICATION OF EFFECT OF CERTAIN PROVI2 SIONS OF VARIOUS EXECUTIVE ORDERS.

3 The following provisions of Executive orders shall

4 have no further force or effect:

5 (1) Section 5(g) of Executive Order 11905.

6 (2) Section 2–305 of Executive Order 12036.

7 (3) Section 2.11 of Executive Order 12333.

Æ
**EXHIBIT32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER to 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES –OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of EF Johnson Technologies, Inc. (the“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Jana Ahlfinger Bell, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer ofthe Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

 

1.                       The Report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and

 

2.                       The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods expressed inthe Report.

 

 
|   | **/S/  Jana Ahlfinger Bell** |
|--------|------------------------------|
|   | Jana Ahlfinger Bell          |
|   | Chief Financial Officer      |

 

**July 30, 2008**

 

*A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained bythe Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.*

 

----
Exhibit 32.01

                            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 Quarterly Report of Westside Energy Corporation
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof
("Report"), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below,
hereby certifies pursuant 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to knowledge:

         1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

Dated: October 7, 2005            /s/ Jimmy D. Wright
                                 -------------------
                                 Jimmy D. Wright
                                 Chief Executive Officer
                                 Chief Financial Officer
9

A.5. Average Effective Interest Rates on Non-real-estate Bank Loans Made to FarmersPercent

Size of loan Si

Purpose of loan (thousands of dollars) 

Other Farm 

current machinery 3 10 25 100

All Feeder Other operating and to to to and Sma

Period loans livestock livestock expenses1 equipment Other2 9 24 99 over mid-

1995...... 9.5 10.1 10.2 10.0 10.3 8.8 10.6 10.5 10.3 9.0 1996...... 8.4 8.8 9.5 8.6 9.7 8.0 10.2 10.1 9.8 7.8 1997...... 9.2 9.6 9.8 9.9 9.8 8.5 10.2 10.0 9.9 8.8 1998...... 9.0 9.4 9.7 9.6 9.3 8.0 10.1 9.9 9.7 8.4 1999...... 8.7 9.1 9.1 9.2 8.8 7.6 9.7 9.5 9.3 8.1 2000...... 9.7 9.8 9.9 9.9 9.3 9.3 10.3 10.2 10.1 9.4 2001...... 7.8 7.6 8.0 8.4 8.3 7.0 9.1 8.7 8.3 7.3 2002...... 5.9 6.1 5.8 6.4 6.7 4.8 7.3 7.0 6.5 5.3 2003...... 5.4 5.1 5.4 5.7 6.0 4.6 6.7 6.4 5.9 4.8 2004...... 5.4 5.3 5.5 5.7 5.5 4.8 6.6 6.4 5.9 5.0 2005...... 6.7 6.9 6.9 7.0 7.0 6.0 7.7 7.5 7.1 6.5 2006...... 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.4 8.4 7.7 8.9 8.9 8.6 8.0 2003: Q4... 5.0 4.7 5.4 5.2 5.6 4.4 6.4 6.2 5.7 4.2 2004: Q1... 5.3 5.1 5.9 5.6 5.5 4.6 6.6 6.2 5.8 5.0  Q2... 5.2 4.8 5.3 5.4 5.4 4.7 6.5 6.2 5.5 4.7  Q3... 5.5 5.4 5.5 5.8 5.6 5.0 6.6 6.5 5.9 5.1  Q4... 5.5 5.5 5.2 6.0 5.5 4.9 6.9 6.5 6.3 5.1 2005: Q1... 6.6 6.3 6.3 6.9 6.9 5.7 7.3 6.9 6.9 6.4  Q2... 6.5 6.5 6.7 6.8 6.8 6.0 7.6 7.4 6.9 6.3  Q3... 6.7 6.9 6.8 7.1 6.9 5.8 7.7 7.6 7.1 6.3  Q4... 7.4 7.5 7.7 7.5 7.7 6.7 8.3 8.1 7.7 7.1 2006: Q1... 8.0 7.9 8.0 8.1 8.1 7.3 8.5 8.5 8.2 7.8  Q2... 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.3 8.0 7.4 8.6 8.8 8.5 7.8  Q3... 8.6 8.4 8.8 8.8 9.0 8.3 9.3 9.2 8.7 8.4  Q4... 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.7 9.1 7.5 9.2 9.0 8.8 8.1 2007: Q1... 8.5 8.9 8.3 8.7 8.9 8.1 9.2 9.1 8.8 8.4  Q2... 8.6 9.0 8.5 8.9 8.7 7.9 9.2 9.1 8.9 8.4  Note. Data are estimates from the Federal Reserve System’s Survey of the Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers. Effective (compoundcalculated from the stated rate and other terms of the loans and weighted by loan size. Quarterly estimates are expressed as an annual 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.
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1920

To amend the provision of title 5, United States Code, commonly referred

to as the ‘‘Monroney amendment’’, to read as it last did before the

enactment of Public Law 99–145.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 21, 2001

Mr. CHAMBLISS (for himself, Mr. RILEY, Mr. JONES of North Carolina, Mr.

RODRIGUEZ, and Mr. BISHOP) introduced the following bill; which was

referred to the Committee on Government Reform

A BILL

To amend the provision of title 5, United States Code, commonly referred to as the ‘‘Monroney amendment’’, to

read as it last did before the enactment of Public Law

99–145.

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

3 SECTION 1. ‘‘MONRONEY AMENDMENT’’ RESTORED TO ITS

4 PRIOR FORM.

5 Paragraph (2) of section 5343(d) of title 5, United

6 States Code, is amended to read as such paragraph last

7 read before the enactment of section 1242 of the Depart-
2

•HR 1920 IH

1 ment of Defense Authorization Act, 1986 (Public Law 99–

2 145; 99 Stat. 735).

Æ
r 

oC() - It:t~

JS O(/~11 ~c Au I,"{(f ~" j 

No. 08-1873 

JAN F. BECKER, 

Petitioner, Appellant, 

v.
 

MARGARET BEIGHTLER, ET AL.,
 

Respondents, Appellees.
 

Before 

Lynch, Chief Judge,
 

Boudin and Lipez, Circuit Judges.
 

JUDGMENT 

Entered: November 12, 2008 

Appellant's motion to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, a 

certificate of appealability is denied, and the appeal is 

terminated, essentially for the reasons stated in the May 19, 2008 

Report and Recommendation. 

By the Court: 

lsi Richard Cushing Donovan, Clerk. 

cc:	 Certified and Issued as Mandata 

Kelly Ayotte under Fed. R. App. P. 41.

Jan Becker 

Date: '/f!/0 

Case 1:08-cv-00185-SM Document 13 Filed 01/12/09 Page 1 of 1