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

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 901

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to construct a bridge on Federal 

land west of and adjacent to Folsom Dam in California, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 25, 2003

Mr. OSE (for himself and Mr. DOOLITTLE) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Resources 

A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to construct a 

bridge on Federal land west of and adjacent to Folsom 

Dam in California, and for other purposes.

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

3 SECTION 1. CONSTRUCTION OF BRIDGE ADJACENT TO FOL4 SOM DAM, CALIFORNIA. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Interior may 

6 carry out a project to design and construct a bridge on 

7 Federal land west of and adjacent to Folsom Dam in Cali8 fornia. In carrying out the project, the Secretary may also 

9 construct necessary linkages from the bridge to existing 
2

•HR 901 IH 

1 roadways and provide for reestablishment of administra2 tive facilities located at the Dam that will be affected by 

3 construction of the bridge. 

4 (b) DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION.—In designing and 

5 constructing the bridge, the Secretary shall—

6 (1) maximize the economy, safety, and security 

7 of Folsom Dam’s future operation, maintenance, and 

8 construction activities; and 

9 (2) provide appropriate sizing and linkages to 

10 support present and future traffic flow requirements 

11 for the city of Folsom. 

12 (c) TRANSFER TO CITY OF FOLSOM.—Before initi13 ation of construction of the bridge, the Secretary shall 

14 enter into an agreement with the city of Folsom to provide 

15 that, upon completion of construction of the bridge—

16 (1) the Secretary shall transfer to the city of 

17 Folsom all right, title, and interest of the United 

18 States to the bridge and connecting structures; 

19 (2) the Secretary shall transfer to the city of 

20 Folsom necessary easements to provide access to the 

21 bridge; and 

22 (3) the city of Folsom shall assume full respon23 sibility for operation and maintenance of the bridge 

24 and connecting structures in perpetuity. 
3

•HR 901 IH 

1 (d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is 

2 authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section a 

3 total of $66,500,000 for fiscal years beginning after Sep4 tember 30, 2003.

Æ
#### George LUSTER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James SCHOMIG; Martha Sims, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 11-17769.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 19, 2012.*

Filed Jan. 3, 2013.

George Luster, Indian Springs, NV, pro se.

Clark G. Leslie, Esquire, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, AGNV-Office of The Nevada Attorney General, Carson City, NV, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

George Luster, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations arising from defendants’ failure to provide adequate lighting. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. *Toguchi v. Chung,*391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir.2004). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment for Sims on Luster’s conditions-of-confinement claim because Luster failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether he was actually denied adequate lighting in his cell. *See Keenan v. Hall,*83 F.3d 1083, 1089 (9th Cir.1996) (“To sustain an Eighth Amendment claim, the plaintiff must prove a denial of 'the minimal civilized measure of life’s necessities,’ occurring through ‘deliberate indifference’ by prison personnel or officers.” (citations omitted)); *Hoptowit v. Spellman,*753 F.2d 779, 783 (9th Cir.1985) (finding Eight Amendment violation where the evidence showed that the prison lighting “was inadequate for reading ... and hindered attempts to insure that basic sanitation was maintained”).

Luster makes other claims concerning his motions for appointment of counsel, for leave to add a defendant, and for injunc-tive relief that are not supported.

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief. *See Padgett v. Wright,*587 F.3d 983, 985 n. 2 (9th Cir.2009) (per curiam).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Watsco, Inc. (Watsco) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Albert H.
Nahmad, as Chief Executive Officer of Watsco, Barry S. Logan, as Senior Vice President of Watsco and Ana M. Menendez, as Chief Financial Officer of Watsco, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
§ 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to our 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 Watsco.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Albert H. NahmadAlbert H. NahmadChief Executive OfficerFebruary 26, 2010/s/ Barry S. LoganBarry S. LoganSenior Vice PresidentFebruary 26, 2010/s/ Ana M. MenendezAna M. MenendezChief Financial OfficerFebruary 26, 2010


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 Watsco and will be retained by Watsco and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 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 Watsco for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
Exhibit 32.2








Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350


(Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)








In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Stratus Properties Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter ending March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Erin D. Pickens, as Senior Vice President & Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of her 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: May 16, 2011











/s/ Erin D. Pickens


Erin D. Pickens


Senior Vice President &


Chief Financial Officer








A signed original 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.





This certification shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of § 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
###                                     THE AAL MUTUAL FUNDS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                            9
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                     YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998  
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         214,963
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               151,510
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                    10
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    105,361
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                       1,234,717
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                         1,253,113
<LOANS>                                      3,270,581
<ALLOWANCE>                                     40,282
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,211,919
<DEPOSITS>                                   4,256,662
<SHORT-TERM>                                   355,322
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             38,974
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,800
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                     558,161
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               5,211,919
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                246,534
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               81,168
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                 8,411
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               336,113
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             107,458
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             122,981
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          213,132
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       73
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 839
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                195,993
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 77,837
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      77,837
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    52,679
<EPS-PRIMARY><F1>                                 2.26
<EPS-DILUTED><F1>                                 2.24
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.92
<LOANS-NON>                                     11,497
<LOANS-PAST>                                     3,765
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                 2,660
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                44,543
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   12,630
<RECOVERIES>                                     8,296
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               40,282
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            40,181
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            101
        

</TABLE>
No. 990.

#### H. Reeve Angel *&*Co., Inc. *v.*United States.

April 29, 1946.

*Frederick W. Brooks*for petitioner.

*Solicitor General McGrath, Assistant Attorney General Rao*and *John R. Benney*for the United States.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals denied.
#### F. B. VANDEGRIFT & CO. v. UNITED STATES.

(Circuit Court, S. D. New York.

April 18, 1901.)

No. 2,896.

L Customs Duties—Classification—Lilt Buds.

Lily buds, imported in condition to open In full bloom immediately upon arrival at tbeir destination in tbis country, are dutiable as '“lilies,” under .tariff act of July 24, 1897, c. 11, § 1, Schedule G, par. 251 (30 Stat. 170, U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1650), and are not free of duty under paragraph 617, § 2, c. 11, of said act (30 Stat. 199, U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1685), as “vegetable substances, crude or unmanufactured, not otherwise specially provided for.”

Appeal by F. B. Vandegrift & Co., importers, from a decision of the Board of General Appraisers, which affirmed the decision of *1003the collector of customs at the port of New York in assessing duty on the merchandise in question.

Howard T. Walden, for importers.

Henry C. Platt, Asst. U. S. Atty.

TOWNSEND, District Judge.

The merchandise in question comprises lily buds imported from Bermuda. They were assessed for duty at 25 per cent, ad valorem, under the provisions of paragraph 251 of the act of July 24, 1897, c. 11, § 1, Schedule G, par. 251 (30 Stat. 170, U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1650), for “lilies * * * and natural flowers of all kinds, preserved or fresh, suitable for decorative purposes,” and are claimed to be exempt from duty under the provisions of paragraph 617, § 2, c. 11, of the same act (30 Stat. 199, U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1685), as “vegetable substances, crude or unmanufactured, not otherwise specially provided for.”

The evidence shows that the buds are designed for importation in condition to open into lilies in full bloom immediately upon their arrival at their destination in this country. They are therefore lilies within the provisions of said paragraph 231, and the decision of the Board of General Appraisers is affirmed.
EX-10.8



 Exhibit 10.8 

ORBCOMM Inc. 
 Summary of Compensation of Non-Employee Directors* and 
 Non-Executive
Chairman of the Board 
 (as of January 1, 2013) 

 

	1.	Annual Retainer Fees 

  

	 	•	 	 Non-Employee Directors*: $35,000 in cash paid quarterly. 



 

	 	•	 	 Non-Executive Chairman of the Board: $50,000 in cash paid quarterly. 



 

	 	•	 	 Deferrals: Directors may elect to defer all or part of the cash payment of retainer fees until such time as specified, with interest on deferred
amounts accruing quarterly at 120% of the Federal long-term rate set each month by the Secretary of the Treasury. 


  

	2.	Committee Membership Fees (Non-Employee Directors only*) 

  

	 	•	 	 Audit Committee: $3,000 ($10,000 for the Chairman). 


  

	 	•	 	 Compensation Committee: $3,000 ($10,000 for the Chairman). 



 

	 	•	 	 Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee: $3,000 ($10,000 for the Chairman). 



 

	 	•	 	 Fees are paid quarterly in cash. Directors may elect to defer all or part of the payment of committee fees until such time as specified, with interest
on deferred amounts accruing quarterly at 120% of the Federal long-term rate set each month by the Secretary of the Treasury. Audit Committee members may elect to defer all or part of the payment of retainer fees for Audit Committee service by
electing to receive restricted shares of common stock valued at the closing price of the Company’s common stock on Nasdaq on the date each committee fee payment would otherwise be made in cash. 



 

	 	•	 	 Attendance Fees: $1,000 for each committee meeting attended 



 

	3.	Annual Awards 

  

	 	•	 	 Non-Employee Directors*/Non-Executive Chairman of the Board: Time-based restricted stock units (RSUs) granted on or about January 2 of each
year with a value of $50,000 based on the closing price of the Company’s common stock on Nasdaq on the date of grant and vesting on the immediately following January 1. The RSUs will be granted to eligible directors under the
Company’s 2006 Long-Term Incentives Plan. 


  

	*	Other than Marco Fuchs, who does not receive annual retainer fees, committee membership fees or annual awards of RSUs. 


 

	4.	Non-Executive Chairman of the Board Salary 

  

	 	•	Annual base salary of $50,000 (at-will employment)
<PAGE>


                                                                   EXHIBIT 32(b)


              SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

         In connection with the Annual Report of New Valley Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-K/A for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, J.
Bryant Kirkland III, 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; and

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




March 31, 2005                         /s/ J. Bryant Kirkland III
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       J. Bryant Kirkland III
                                       Vice President and Chief Financial
                                       Officer
August
11, 2008
 
 Securities
and Exchange Commission
 100 F
Street, N.E.
 Washington,
D.C. 20549
 
 Commissioners:
 
 We are
aware that our report dated August 11, 2008 on our review of interim financial
information of Stratus Properties Inc. for the three and six month
periods ended June 30, 2008 and 2007and included in the Company's
quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 is
incorporated by reference in its Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File Nos.
33-78798, 333-31059, 333-52995 and 333-104288).
 
  Very
truly yours,
  
 /s/
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
 
 Dallas,
Texas
No. 1189.

#### Toucey *v.*New York Life Insurance Co.

May 27, 1946.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court. of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
#### James REEDOM, Appellant v. Tom VILSACK, Secretary of Agriculture, Appellee.

No. 12-5397.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

March 19, 2013.

James Reedom, Fort Worth, TX, pro se.

R. Craig Lawrence, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Washington, DC, for Appellee.

Before: GARLAND, Chief Judge; and HENDERSON and KAVANAUGH, Circuit Judges.

*JUDGMENT*

PER CURIAM.

■ This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by appellant. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C.Cir. Rule 34(j). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed November 29, 2012 be affirmed. The district court correctly determined appellant lacked standing, because the grants at issue may be awarded only to organizations. *See*7 C.F.R. § 4284.620.

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM (A) THE
THERATECH, INC. CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE
SIX MONTHS ENDED  JUNE 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH (B) FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                      18,163,154
<SECURITIES>                                 6,885,118
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,410,547
<ALLOWANCES>                                    91,034
<INVENTORY>                                  2,879,598
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            33,674,806
<PP&E>                                      26,144,006
<DEPRECIATION>                               7,088,166
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              56,378,794
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        8,558,092
<BONDS>                                      7,927,139
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       206,858
<OTHER-SE>                                  38,474,705
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                56,378,794
<SALES>                                      6,576,799
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            18,039,341
<CGS>                                        4,810,182
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               15,436,799
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                30,260
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             464,027
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,108,255
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          2,108,255
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,108,255
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.10
        

</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**Independent Auditors’ Consent**

 

The Board of Directors of SMTC Corporation 

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement(No. 333-44250) on Form S-8 and the registration statement (No. 333-33208) on Form S-3 of SMTC Corporation of our report dated February 7, 2003, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of SMTC Corporation as of December 31, 2001 and 2002,and the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in shareholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2002, and the related financial statement schedule, which report appears inthe December 31, 2002, annual report on Form 10-K of SMTC Corporation. Our report refers to changes in accounting policies on goodwill, impairment or disposal of long-lived assets, and extraordinary items. 

 

/s/ KPMG LLP 

 

Chartered Accountants 

 

Toronto, Canada 

March 26, 2003 

 

 

1
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

The Board of Directors and Stockholders 

Orchid Cellmark Inc.: 

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements on Form S-3 (No. 333-60582, No. 333-85550, No. 333-98825, No.333-105732, No. 333-111892, and No. 333-113981) and on FormS-8 (No. 333-126197, No. 333-53118, and No. 333-76744) of Orchid Cellmark Inc. of our reports dated May 19, 2006, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Orchid Cellmark Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2005and 2004, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity and comprehensive loss, and cash flows for each of the years in the three–year period ended December 31, 2005, and the related financial statementschedule, management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005 and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, which reportsappear in the December 31, 2005 annual report on Form 10-K of Orchid Cellmark Inc. 

 

Our report dated May 19, 2006, on management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, expressesour opinion that Orchid Cellmark Inc. did not maintain effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005 because of the effect of material weaknesses on the achievement of the objectives of the control criteria andcontains an explanatory paragraph that states that material weaknesses were identified in the following areas: inadequate information and communication and inadequate policies and procedures to ensure that accurate and reliable interim and annualconsolidated financial statements were prepared and reviewed on a timely basis. 

 

/s/ KPMG LLP 

 

Princeton, New Jersey 

May 19, 2006