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

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #15291 and #15292; TEXAS Disaster Number TX-00488]

# AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Amendment 3.

# SUMMARY:

This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of Texas (FEMA-4332-DR), dated 09/04/2017.

*Incident:*                         Hurricane Harvey.                    

*Incident Period:*                         08/23/2017 through 09/15/2017.                    

# DATES:

Issued on 09/19/2017.

*Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         11/03/2017.                    

*Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         06/04/2018.                    

# ADDRESSES:

Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for Private Non-Profit organizations in the State of Texas, dated 09/04/2017, is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster.

*Primary Counties:*                     Austin, Bastrop, Burleson, Grimes, Lee, Madison, Washington                

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

James E. Rivera,

Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.

[FR Doc. 2017-20742 Filed 9-27-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
#### In re: David Hall CRUM, Petitioner.

Nos. 07-2186, 08-6387.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: June 10, 2008.

Decided: June 20, 2008.

David Hall Crum, Petitioner/Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Michael Horn, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees.

Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

No. 07-2186 petition denied; No. OS-6387 affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

These consolidated cases pertain to federal prisoner David Hall Crum. In No. 07-2186, Crum petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) motion seeking reconsideration of the order denying his consolidated 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petitions. He requests an *224order from this court directing the district court to act. Our review of the docket sheet reveals that the district court issued an order on February 29, 2008, denying Crum’s motion for reconsideration. Accordingly, although we grant Crum leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny as moot both the mandamus petition and Crum’s motion to expedite.

In No. 08-6387, Crum appeals the district court’s orders adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and denying relief on the § 2241 petitions and denying Crum’s Rule 59(e) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Crum v. Attorney General of the United States,*No. 5:04-cv00983, 2007 WL 781935 (S.D. W.Va. Mar. 13, 2007 & Feb. 29, 2008). We deny as moot Crum’s motions to expedite and for bail pending appeal.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

No. 07-2186 *PETITION DENIED.*

No. 08-6387 *AFFIRMED.*
11 TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND

, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

David Earl Resendez

, * From the 266 th District

Court of Erath County,

Trial Court No. CR13525.

Vs. No. 11

- 12

- 00080

- CR * March 6, 2014

The State of Texas, * Memorandum Opinion by Willson, J.

(Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

Willson , J. , and Bailey, J. )

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is

no error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court ’ s

opinion, the judgment of the trial c ourt is in all things affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM PONDER
INDUSTRIES, INC.'S CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF AUGUST 31, 1997, AND ITS
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE YEAR THEN ENDED AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000859917
<NAME> PONDER INDUSTRIES, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1997
<CASH>                                               4
<SECURITIES>                                       800
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,791
<ALLOWANCES>                                       657
<INVENTORY>                                      2,622
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 7,606
<PP&E>                                          31,383
<DEPRECIATION>                                  14,278
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  26,617
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,664
<BONDS>                                         13,838
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           176
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,293
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    26,617
<SALES>                                         21,875
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                21,875
<CGS>                                            9,555
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,555
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                17,150
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   519
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,402
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (9,921)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (9,921)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (9,921)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.73)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.73)
        

</TABLE>
# **EXHIBIT 32.2**

# ** **

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350**

 

In connection with the March 31, 2005 Form 10-Q of Cornell Companies,Inc. (the “Company”) as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission onthe date hereof (the “Report”), I, John R. Nieser, Chief Financial Officer,certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, andthat the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
|   | /s/  John R. Nieser                      |   |
|--------|------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | John  R. Nieser, Chief Financial Officer |
|   | May 10, 2005                             |

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-25-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-28-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-25-1997
<CASH>                                          13,370
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  103,168
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    294,816
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               466,686
<PP&E>                                          44,483
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 598,205
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          173,063
<BONDS>                                        305,941
<COMMON>                                           137
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                     114,432
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   598,205
<SALES>                                        858,739
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               858,739
<CGS>                                          583,146
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  583,146
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               271,754
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              27,296
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (16,083)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (5,247)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (10,836)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (10,836)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.79)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACED FROM THE INTERIM
FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS OF OPTIMAL  ROBOTICS CORP. DATED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         2,342,937<F1>
<SECURITIES>                                   24,636,351
<RECEIVABLES>                                  7,705,289
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    2,432,683
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               37,319,708
<PP&E>                                         653,658<F2>
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 38,141,179
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          3,383,369
<BONDS>                                        250,000<F3>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       42,321,981
<OTHER-SE>                                     (7,814,171)<F4>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   38,141,179
<SALES>                                        22,799,610
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               22,799,610
<CGS>                                          18,007,577
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  18,007,577
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               4,067,553
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (549,284)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                1,273,764
<INCOME-TAX>                                   1,273,764<F5>
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            1,273,764<F5>
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   1,273,764<F5>
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0.14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.14


<FN>
(1)  The  Company's  financial   statements  are  prepared  in  accordance  with
     generally accepted accounting principles in Canada. See Note 6 to financial
     statements for a reconciliation of Canadian and U.S. GAAP.

(2)  Net of depreciation.

(3)  Contract advance.

(4)  Includes  shareholder  deficit,  capital  attributable  to  warrants  and a
     cumulative translation adjustment.

(5)  Any income indicated is offset by loss  carryforwards in the Company's home
     jurisdictions.
</FN>


</TABLE>
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than October 16, 2017.

*A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta*                     (Kathryn Haney, Director of Applications) 1000 Peachtree Street NE., Atlanta, Georgia 30309. Comments can also be sent electronically to                     *Applications.Comments@atl.frb.org:*

                    1.                     *Donald J. Leeper and the Ruthanne C. Leeper Irrevocable Trust,*                     both of Cartersville, Georgia; to retain voting shares of NorthSide Bancshares, Inc., and thereby indirectly retain voting shares of NorthSide Bank, both in Adairsville, Georgia.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 26, 2017.

Yao-Chin Chao,

Assistant Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 2017-20929 Filed 9-28-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

JANUARY 8, 2009

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 08-12846

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 06-00027-CR-3-RV

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

EUGENE JEROME SMITH,

a.k.a. Sperm,

Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Florida

_________________________

(January 8, 2009)

Before BARKETT, MARCUS and FAY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:
Eugene Jerome Smith appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for

new trial based on newly discovered evidence. Smith was convicted of one count

of conspiracy to possess cocaine with intent to distribute and two counts of

possession of cocaine with intent to distribute. In support of his motion for a new

trial, Smith produced evidence that he was in Tampa when a witness, Carisha

Jones, testified that he was in Pensacola. Additionally, he asserted new evidence

showing that Jones made statements to the police describing drug sales at a certain

address as drug sales at his home, when Smith no longer lived at that address at the

time of the sales.

We review a district court’s denial of a defendant’s motion for a new trial

for abuse of discretion. Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33 provides that a

defendant may file a motion for a new trial on the basis of newly discovered

evidence, and “the court may vacate judgment and grant a new trial if the interest

of justice so requires.” Fed.R.Crim.P. 33(a), (b)(1). To obtain a new trial on the

basis of newly discovered evidence, a defendant must show that: (1) the evidence

was in fact discovered following trial; (2) the defendant exercised due care to

discover the evidence; (3) the evidence is not merely cumulative or impeaching;

(4) the evidence is material; and (5) the evidence is of such a nature that a new trial

would probably produce a different result. United States v. Lee, 68 F.3d 1267,

2
1273 (11th Cir. 1995). “The failure to satisfy any one of these elements is fatal to

a motion for new trial.” Id. at 1274. Evidence of an alibi is particularly “within

the knowledge of the defendant himself,” making it extremely difficult for a

defendant to show that the evidence is new or could not have been discovered with

due diligence. United States v. Williams, 816 F.2d 1527, 1530-31 (11th Cir.

1987).

In this case, the evidence proffered by Smith cannot be considered new

evidence and could have been discovered by Smith if he had exercised due

diligence. Accordingly, the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying

Smith’s motion for a new trial.

AFFIRMED.

3
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           4,645
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,417
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (328)
<INVENTORY>                                      6,015
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                18,325
<PP&E>                                           8,763
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (3,371)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  40,222
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,340
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             7
<OTHER-SE>                                      21,415
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    40,222
<SALES>                                         29,257
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                29,257
<CGS>                                           11,070
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   11,070
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                13,573
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 970
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,597
<INCOME-TAX>                                        20
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,577
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,577
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .49
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .46


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.2

                                  CERTIFICATION
                 PURSUANT TO 18 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1350


      The undersigned hereby certifies that the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for
the year ended December 31, 2004 of Nanobac Pharmaceuticals, Incorporated (the
"Company") filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in such
report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.


                                    /s/ John D Stanton
                                    -------------------------------------------
                                    John D Stanton
                                    Chief Financial Officer
                                    April 13, 2005



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Nanobac Pharmaceuticals, Incorporated and will be retained by it and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed September 22, 2021.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D21-576

Lower Tribunal No. F94-14939A

________________

Shawn Johnson,

Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida,

Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Cristina 

Miranda, Judge.

Shawn Johnson, in proper person.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before HENDON, MILLER and BOKOR, JJ. 

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3220 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.3220

                      One Hundred Twelfth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
            the third day of January, two thousand and twelve

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
    170 Evergreen Square SW in Pine City, Minnesota, as the ``Master 
                Sergeant Daniel L. Fedder Post Office''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. MASTER SERGEANT DANIEL L. FEDDER POST OFFICE.
    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 170 Evergreen Square SW in Pine City, Minnesota, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Master Sergeant Daniel L. Fedder Post 
Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Master 
Sergeant Daniel L. Fedder Post Office''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```