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

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3357 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3357

   To restore sums to the Highway Trust Fund, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 28, 2009

  Mr. Rangel (for himself, Mr. Obey, and Mr. Oberstar) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To restore sums to the Highway Trust Fund, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. FUNDING OF THE HIGHWAY TRUST FUND.

    Subsection (f) of section 9503 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
(relating to determination of trust fund balances after September 30, 
1998) is amended--
            (1) by striking paragraph (2), and
            (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
            ``(2) Increase in fund balance.--Out of money in the 
        Treasury not otherwise appropriated, there is hereby 
        appropriated (without fiscal year limitation) to the Highway 
        Trust Fund $5,000,000,000.''.

SEC. 2. ADVANCES TO THE UNEMPLOYMENT TRUST FUND AND OTHER FUNDS.

    The item relating to ``Department of Labor--Employment and Training 
Administration--Advances to the Unemployment Trust Fund and Other 
Funds'' in title I of division F of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 
2009 (Public Law 111-8; 123 Stat. 754) is amended by striking ``to 
remain available through September 30, 2010'' and all that follows 
(before the heading for the following item) and inserting ``such sums 
as may be necessary''.

SEC. 3. FHA MORTGAGE INSURANCE COMMITMENT AUTHORITY.

    The item relating to ``Federal Housing Administration--Mutual 
Mortgage Insurance Program Account'' in title II of division I of the 
Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-8; 123 Stat. 966) is 
amended by striking ``$315,000,000,000'' and inserting 
``$400,000,000,000''.

SEC. 4. GNMA MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES GUARANTEE COMMITMENT AUTHORITY.

    The item relating to ``Government National Mortgage Association--
Guarantees of Mortgage-Backed Securities Loan Guarantee Program 
Account'' in title II of division I of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 
2009 (Public Law 111-8; 123 Stat. 967) is amended by striking 
``$300,000,000,000'' and inserting ``$400,000,000,000''.
                                 <all>
```
#### HUIYUN HUANG, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 05-70191.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 22, 2008.*

Filed May 5, 2008.

Norman Kwai Wing Wong, New York, NY, for Petitioner.

CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of The District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of The District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Virginia Lum Fax, U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: GRABER, FISHER, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM**

Huiyun Huang, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of *713Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reconsider the BIA’s order summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order denying her application for asylum, withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review motions to reconsider for abuse of discretion, *Cano-Merida v. INS,*311 F.3d 960, 964 (9th Cir.2002), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Huang’s motion to reconsider because the motion failed to identify any legal or factual errors in the underlying decision. *See*8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(b)(1) (“A motion to reconsider shall state the reasons for the motion by specifying the errors of fact or law in the prior Board decision and shall be supported by pertinent authority.”).

We lack jurisdiction to review Huang’s remaining contentions relating to the agency’s determination that asylum was time-barred, the State Department comments, the denial of CAT protection, and alleged due process violations by the IJ and the BIA in summarily affirming the IJ decision because she failed to raise them to the BIA. *See Barron v. Ashcroft,*358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir.2004) (exhaustion is mandatory and jurisdictional).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provid*713ed by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** **

**Exhibit 15.1**

** **

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLICACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

**To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of GW Pharmaceuticals plc**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in RegistrationStatement No. 333-195747 on Form F-3 of our reports dated 7 December 2015, relating to the consolidated financial statements ofGW Pharmaceuticals plc, and the effectiveness of GW Pharmaceuticals plc’s internal control over financial reporting (whichreport expresses an adverse opinion on the effectiveness of GW Pharmaceuticals plc’s internal control over financial reportingbecause of a material weakness), appearing in this Annual Report on Form 20-F of GW Pharmaceuticals plc for the year ended 30September 2015.

 

/s/ Deloitte LLP

 

London, United Kingdom

7 December 2015
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 November 2, 2017.

*A. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas*                     (Robert L. Triplett III, Senior Vice President) 2200 North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-2272:                

                    1.                     *Robert G. Good,*                     Corrales, New Mexico; and Robert G. Good, Corrales, New Mexico, M. Carolyn Good, and Good Living Trust/Family Trust, both of Los Ranchos, New Mexico, Cynthia Alysce Good, and the 2005 Natalie Grace Good Trust, both of Andover, Massachusetts, Lisa Lynn Thompson, Lorena, Texas, Lisa Lynn Graves Heritage Trust, Thomas Cody Graves, Cody Clark Graves, Cody Clark Graves Heritage Trust, Debra Lee Bridges, Debra Lee Graves Heritage Trust, all of Goldthwaite, Texas, as a group acting in concert; to retain voting shares Goldthwaite Bancshares, Inc., and thereby retain voting shares of Mills County State Bank, both of Goldthwaite, Texas.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, October 12, 2017.

Ann Misback,

Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 2017-22485 Filed 10-16-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

In re: EDRA D. BLIXSETH, 

Debtor,

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

 RICHARD J. SAMSON, Chapter 7

Trustee for the Estate of Edra D. Blixseth, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

WESTERN CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC, 

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 14-35741

D.C. No. 2:13-cv-00025-DLC

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Montana

Dana L. Christensen, Chief Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted February 7, 2017

Seattle, Washington

Before: FISHER, PAEZ and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

Western Capital Partners, LLC, appeals the district court’s order affirming

the bankruptcy court’s judgment in favor of the bankruptcy trustee, Richard

FILED

MAR 09 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

*This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Samson, on the trustee’s claims of constructively fraudulent transfer and usury. 

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d), and we reverse in part, affirm in

part and remand.

1. Before the bankruptcy court, Samson sought to avoid debtor Edra

Blixseth’s guaranty of a $13 million loan Western Capital issued to Blixseth’s son. 

A constructively fraudulent transfer claim requires proof (1) the challenged

transfer occurred within two years of the bankruptcy; (2) the debtor received less

than reasonably equivalent value for the transfer; and (3) the debtor was insolvent

at the time of the transfer. See In re Fitness Holdings Int’l, Inc., 714 F.3d 1141,

1145 (9th Cir. 2013); 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1)(B). The bankruptcy court concluded

Blixseth was insolvent at the time of the transfer after it excluded Blixseth’s

interest in the undivided portion of her marital community, which was worth over

$400 million at the time of the loan. This was error. Because Blixseth’s creditors

could have reached her share of the community property through legal process, the

property should have been included in the solvency analysis. See In re Marriage

of Schenk, 279 Cal. Rptr. 651, 654 n.2 (Ct. App. 1991) (creditors may collect postseparation debts from the debtor spouse’s share of community property); see also

2-101 Collier on Bankruptcy § 101.32 (16th ed. 2016) (“[I]t is obvious that

interests which are subject to creditors’ remedies must necessarily be

2
considered.”). Including these assets in the solvency analysis, Blixseth was solvent

under all of the relevant tests. See 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1)(B)(ii). Samson’s

fraudulent transfer claim therefore fails.

2. The district court held Western Capital waived its argument that res

judicata precluded Samson’s usury claim. Although Western Capital reasserts its

res judicata argument in conclusory fashion before this court, it has not identified

any error in the district court’s conclusion this argument was waived. We affirm

the entry of judgment for Samson on the usury claim.

REVERSED IN PART, AFFIRMED IN PART AND REMANDED.

EACH PARTY SHALL BEAR ITS OWN COSTS ON APPEAL.

3
```

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 202 (Friday, October 20, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 48875]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22764]

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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration #15352 and #15353; CALIFORNIA Disaster Number CA-
00279]

Presidential Declaration Amendment of a Major Disaster for the 
State of California

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Amendment 2.

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

SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a 
major disaster for the State of California (FEMA-4344-DR), dated 10/12/
2017.
    Incident: Wildfires.
    Incident Period: 10/08/2017 and continuing.

DATES: Issued on 10/14/2017.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 12/11/2017.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 07/12/2018.

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 the State of California, dated 10/12/2017, is hereby 
amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the 
disaster:

Primary Counties (Physical Damage and Economic Injury Loans): Butte, 
Lake, Mendocino, Yuba
Contiguous Counties (Economic Injury Loans Only):
    California: Colusa, Glenn, Humboldt, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, 
Sierra, Sutter, Tehama, Trinity

    All other information in the original declaration remains 
unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

Rafaela Monchek,
Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2017-22764 Filed 10-19-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
```
Exhibit 32.1

SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION

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 Emergency Filtration Products, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending September 30, 2004, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Douglas K. Beplate, Principal Executive 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 and
belief:

 (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 result of operations of the Company.


/s/ Douglas K. Beplate
Douglas K. Beplate, Principal Executive Officer

Date: November 12, 2004


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 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.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 12.1

                          MORAN TRANSPORTATION COMPANY

               Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                             (Amounts in thousands)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                               Period      Period
                                                            Jan 1, 1994 July 1, 1994
                                    Year Ended December 31      Thru         Thru      Year Ended December 31
                                    ------ --------------      July 11,     Dec. 31,      ----- ----------
                                       1992          1993         1994        1994         1995         1996
                                   --------      --------     --------    --------     --------     --------
<S>                                 <C>          <C>            <C>        <C>        <C>          <C>
Pretax income from
continuing operations               $ 5,461      $ 9,764        $2,054     $1,536     $  (136)     $ 2,113

Capitalized interest                      0          (28)          (62)         0           0            0
Undistributed
from affiliiated
partnership (Shipmor)                     0       (1,149)            0          0           0            0

Undistributed income
from joint venture (MMA)               (101)           0             0          0           0            0
                                     ------      -------        ------     ------     -------      -------
                                    $ 5,360      $ 8,587        $1,992     $1,536     $  (136)     $ 2,113
                                     ======      =======        ======     ======     =======      =======
Fixed charges
Interest expense and
amortization of debt discount
and premium on all
indebtedness (a)                    $ 3,092      $ 2,077        $  975     $4,810     $10,192      $10,132

Rentals
1/3 rent expense (b)                    444          366           192        173         351          387
                                     ------      -------        ------     ------     -------      -------
Total fixed charges                 $ 3,536      $ 2,443        $1,167     $4,983     $10,543      $10,519
                                     ======      =======        ======     ======     =======      =======
Earnings before
income taxes and
fixed charges                       $ 8,896      $11,030        $3,159     $6,519     $10,407      $12,632
                                     ======      =======        ======     ======     =======      =======
Ratio of earnings to
fixed charges                           2.5          4.5           2.7        1.3         1.0          1.2
                                     ======      =======        ======     ======     =======      =======
</TABLE>
(a) Included in interest expense is capitalized interest related to the
    construction of new equipment.
(b) The portion of rentals classified as fixed charges is deemed to be
    representative of the interest factor.
#### Sussan NG; Lin Xie, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 07-74081.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 8, 2011.*

Filed March 22, 2011.

Sussan Ng, Seatac, WA, pro se.

Maurice Lamont Chenier, Esquire, Law Office of Maurice Chenier Litigation/Appellate, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioners. Lin Xie, Seatac, WA, pro se.

R. Alexander Goring, Esquire, Michelle Gorden Latour, Esquire, Assistant Director, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Before: FARRIS, LEAVY, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Sussan Ng and Lin Xie, natives of China and citizens of Australia, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s removal order. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, and de novo claims of due process violations, including ineffective assistance of counsel claims. *Mohammed v. Gonzales,*400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir.2005). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

The record does not compel the conclusion that petitioners timely extended or changed their status prior to the expiration of their nonimmigrant visas on June 30, 2005. *See Singh-Kaur v. INS,*183 F.3d 1147, 1150 (9th Cir.1999) (a contrary result is not compelled where there is “[t]he possibility of drawing two inconsistent conclusions from the evidence”) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

The BIA correctly concluded that petitioners’ ineffective assistance of counsel claim fails because they have not demon*726strated prejudice. *See Rojas-Garcia v. Ashcroft,*339 F.3d 814, 826 (9th Cir.2003) (to prevail on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim a petitioner must demonstrate prejudice).

We lack jurisdiction to review petitioners’ unexhausted contention that they are entitled to equitable tolling. *See Barron v. Ashcroft,*358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir.2004) (explaining that this court lacks jurisdiction to review contentions not raised before the agency).

To the extent it is raised, we lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s January 29, 2008, order denying petitioners’ motion to reconsider because they failed to timely petition this court for review of that decision. *See Singh v. INS,*315 F.3d 1186, 1188 (9th Cir.2003).

Petitioners’ remaining contentions are unavailing.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ramell S. Mitchell, Appellant.

[987 NYS2d 589]

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Francis A. Affronti, J.), rendered June 22, 2010. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of burglary in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Present — Scudder, EJ., Smith, Carni, Lindley and Whalen, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-Q OF
SUSQUEHANNA FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           1,212
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   41,617
<ALLOWANCES>                                    (1,621)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                48,084
<PP&E>                                         211,316
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (94,586)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 523,299
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           34,967
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      7,050
<COMMON>                                         1,100
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   523,299
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               194,559
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  148,299
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                (4,493)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              20,286
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 30,467
<INCOME-TAX>                                    12,681
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             17,786
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 (3,316)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    11,571
<EPS-BASIC>                                      10.52
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    10.37


</TABLE>