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

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 170 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 170

    To temporarily permit penalty-free withdrawals from individual 
               retirement plans and section 401(k) plans.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 5, 1993

  Mr. Duncan introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To temporarily permit penalty-free withdrawals from individual 
               retirement plans and section 401(k) plans.

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

SECTION 1. PENALTY-FREE WITHDRAWALS FROM INDIVIDUAL RETIREMENT PLANS 
              AND SECTION 401(k) PLANS DURING 1-YEAR PERIOD

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in the 
case of any distribution from an eligible plan during the 1-year period 
beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act--
            (1) section 72(t) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
        (relating to 10-percent additional tax on early distributions 
        from qualified retirement plans) shall not apply, and
            (2) for purposes of such Code, gross income shall not 
        include 10 percent of the portion of such distribution which 
        would have been includible in gross income if this section had 
        not been enacted.
    (b) Eligible Plan.--For purposes of this section, the term 
``eligible plan'' means--
            (1) an individual retirement account described in section 
        408(a) of such Code,
            (2) an individual retirement annuity described in section 
        408(b) of such Code, or
            (3) a qualified cash or deferred arrangement under section 
        401(k) of such Code.
    (c) Effective Date.--This section shall apply to taxable years 
ending on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.

                                 <all>
```
No. 97-20934 

-1-

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-20934

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

HOMERO HINOJOSA GARCIA; PEDRO

ELIZONDO GARZA,

Defendants-Appellants.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-95-CR-36-2-3

- - - - - - - - - -

March 4, 1999

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Homero Hinojosa Garcia and Pedro Elizondo Garza appeal from

their sentences on remand. In their initial direct appeal, we

affirmed Garcia’s and Garza’s conviction for conspiracy to possess

with intent to distribute, in excess of five kilograms of cocaine,

in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(b)(1)(A) and 846. United States

v. Garza, 118 F.3d 278, 280 (5th Cir. 1997). We reversed their 

money laundering conviction, however, and remanded the case for

resentencing in accordance with this disposition. Id. at 285. On
No. 97-20934 

-2-

remand, the district court determined that, because their initial

sentences were based solely on their drug-conspiracy conviction

because it produced the highest offense level of the counts of

conviction, see U.S.S.G. § 3D1.3, the reversal of the money

laundering conviction had no effect on their sentences upon

resentencing. The district court therefore again sentenced Garcia

to the 405 months’ imprisonment and Garza to 365 months’

imprisonment, as it had done during the initial sentencing.

We need not address the various issues Garcia and Garza

attempt to raise on appeal concerning the validity of their

cocaine-conspiracy conviction. On an appeal following remand, the

only issue for consideration is whether the court below reached its

final decree in due pursuance of this court's previous opinion and

mandate. Burroughs v. FFP Operating Partners, L.P., 70 F.3d 31, 33

(5th Cir. 1995). The district court complied fully with this

court’s opinion and mandate and did not err when it resentenced

Garcia and Garza. 

The district court, however, committed reversible error by

failing to address Garcia and Garza personally at resentencing to

inquire whether the defendants desired to speak in mitigation of

punishment. See United States v. Myers, 150 F.3d 359, 461-65 (5th

Cir. 1998). The sentencing court’s failure to comply with this

rule requires a remand. Id. at 462-63. The case is therefore

REMANDED to the district court for resentencing in accordance with

this opinion.

AFFIRM in part; VACATE and REMAND in part.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<LEGEND>
This  schedule contains  summary financial  information extracted  from the
Consolidated  Balance  Sheets for POWERCOLD CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES at
March 31,  2000  and  the  Consolidated  Statements  of  Operations  for
POWERCOLD CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES for the period ended March 31, 2000
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         363,728
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  127,255
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     34,993
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               647,555
<PP&E>                                          25,311
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,925,542
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,329,918
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            1,250
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         8,925
<OTHER-SE>                                     586,015
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,925,542
<SALES>                                         28,708
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                42,898
<CGS>                                           44,821
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  328,547
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (12,639)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (343,109)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (343,109)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.4)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (0.4)








</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 27 (Thursday, February 8, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 9611]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-3291]



[[Page 9611]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[NAFTA-04199]


United States Sugar Corporation, Clewiston, FL; Notice of 
Termination of Investigation

    Pursuant to Title V of the North American Free Trade Agreement 
Implementation Act (Pub. L. 103-182) concerning transitional adjustment 
assistance, hereinafter called (NAFTA-TAA), and in accordance with 
section 250(a), Subchapter D, Chapter 2, Title II, of the Trade Act of 
1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2273), an investigation was initiated on 
September 19, 2000, in response to a petition filed on behalf of 
workers at United States Sugar Corporation, Clewiston, Florida.
    The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Consequently, further investigation in this case would serve no 
purpose, and the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, D.C., this 5th day of January 2001.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 01-3291 Filed 2-7-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

JUNE 3, 2009

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 08-16843

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 94-00142-CR-1-LSC-ETC

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RANDOLPH HUBBARD,

Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Alabama

_________________________

(June 3, 2009)

Before TJOFLAT, BLACK and BARKETT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Randolph Hubbard is a federal prison inmate serving concurrent sentences
of 250 months for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine base and

for possessing the drug with intent to distribute on two separate occasions. In

April 2008, Hubbard moved the district court pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)

to reduce his sentence in accordance with Amendment 706 to the Sentencing

Guidelines, which reduced base offense levels for cocaine base offenses. The

district court found that Amendment 706 applied and reduced his prison term to

210 months. Nevertheless, the court denied his request for further reduction in

light of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621

(2005), and Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. __, 128 S.Ct. 558, 169 L.Ed.2d

481 (2007). Hubbard now appeals the court’s decision, arguing that the court erred

by not reducing his sentence further based on those cases.

A district court may modify a term of imprisonment in the case of a

defendant who was sentenced to a term of imprisonment based on a sentence range

that has subsequently been lowered by the Sentencing Commission. 18 U.S.C. §

3582(c)(2). However, the Sentencing Guidelines provide that, in general, a district

court “shall not reduce the defendant’s term of imprisonment under 18 U.S.C. §

3582(c)(2) and this policy statement to a term that is less than the minimum of the

amended guideline range.” U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(b)(2)(A).

Hubbard’s argument is foreclosed by this court’s precedent. See United

2
States v. Melvin, 556 F.3d 1190, 1193-94 (11th Cir. 2009), petition for cert. filed,

(U.S. Feb. 10, 2009) (No. 08-8664) (holding that Booker and Kimbrough do not

apply to § 3582(c)(2) proceedings and, accordingly, do not “prohibit the limitations

on a judge’s discretion in reducing a sentence imposed by § 3582(c)(2) and the

applicable policy statement by the Sentencing Commission”).

AFFIRMED.

3
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-1066
AHMAD A.N. DAHMAS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CVS PHARMACY IN MARYLAND, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (CA-96-1025-AW) Submitted: April 29, 1998 Decided: May 15, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ahmad A.N. Dahmas, Appellant Pro Se. Karen Ann Khan, JACKSON, LEWIS, SCHNITZLER & KRUPMAN, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Ahmad A.N. Dahmas appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment for CVS Pharmacy in Maryland on his employment discrimination claims. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, weaffirm on the reasoning of the district court. Dahmas v. CVS Pharmacy , No. CA-96-1025-AW (D. Md. Dec. 22, 1997). Dahmas' expressions of dissatisfaction with his counsel's performance merit no relief. 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.

AFFIRMED
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

I, Charles C. Best, certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Interlink Electronics, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

4. Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15(d)-15(f)) for the registrant and we have: 

a) designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

b) designed such internalcontrol over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financialstatements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; 

c) evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based onsuch evaluation; and 

d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

a) all significant deficiencies and material weakness in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial information; and 

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

Date: May 15, 2008
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3700 

To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to reauthorize grants 

for technical assistance to rural, small, and tribal municipalities, and 

for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 4, 2021 

Mr. DELGADO (for himself and Mr. VAN DREW) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to reauthorize grants for technical assistance to rural, small, 

and tribal municipalities, 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. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Clean Water for Rural 

5 America Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3700 IH

1 SEC. 2. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO RURAL, SMALL, AND 

2 TRIBAL MUNICIPALITIES. 

3 (a) REAUTHORIZATION.—Section 104(u) of the Fed4 eral Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1254(u)) is 

5 amended— 

6 (1) by striking ‘‘and (7)’’ and inserting ‘‘(7)’’; 

7 (2) by striking ‘‘2023’’ and inserting ‘‘2021’’; 

8 and 

9 (3) by inserting ‘‘; and (8) not to exceed 

10 $100,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2022 through 

11 2026 for carrying out subsections (b)(3), (b)(8), and 

12 (g), except that not less than half of the amounts so 

13 appropriated to carry out such subsections in each 

14 such fiscal year shall be used for carrying out sub15 section (b)(8)’’ before the period at the end. 

16 (b) COMMUNICATION.—A nonprofit organization re17 ceiving a grant under section 104(b)(8) of the Federal 

18 Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1254(b)(8)) shall, 

19 prior to carrying out an activity using such grant funds, 

20 consult with the State in which such activity is to be car21 ried out. 

22 (c) REPORT.—Not later than 2 years after the date 

23 of enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Envi24 ronmental Protection Agency shall submit to Congress a 

25 report that describes the implementation of the grants 

26 made under subsections (b)(3), (b)(8), and (g) of section 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3700 IH

1 104 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 

2 U.S.C. 1254) during the 2 fiscal years preceding the date 

3 of the report, including a description of the recipients and 

4 amounts of such grants. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1761

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to extend special treatment

rules under the medicare program for regional referral centers and to

permit a hospital that fails to qualify as a regional referral center

under the program as a result of a change in geographic classification

to decline such change and qualify as such a center.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 21, 1993

Mr. ROBERTS (for himself, Mr. SLATTERY, Mr. LANCASTER, and Mr. BEREUTER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to extend

special treatment rules under the medicare program for

regional referral centers and to permit a hospital that

fails to qualify as a regional referral center under the

program as a result of a change in geographic classification to decline such change and qualify as such a center.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 1761 IH

1 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF SPECIAL TREATMENT RULES

2 UNDER MEDICARE FOR REGIONAL REFER3 RAL CENTERS.

4 (a) EXTENSION THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 1994.—Sec5 tion 6003(d) of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act

6 of 1989 (42 U.S.C. 1395ww note) is amended by striking

7 ‘‘October 1, 1992’’ and inserting ‘‘October 1, 1994’’.

8 (b) PERMITTING HOSPITALS TO DECLINE RECLASSI9 FICATION.—If any hospital fails to qualify as a rural refer10 ral center under section 1886(d)(5)(C) of the Social Secu11 rity Act as a result of a decision by the Medicare Geo12 graphic Classification Review Board under section

13 1886(d)(10) of such Act to reclassify the hospital as being

14 located in an urban area for fiscal year 1994, the Sec15 retary of Health and Human Services shall—

16 (1) notify such hospital of such failure to qual17 ify,

18 (2) provide an opportunity for such hospital to

19 decline such reclassification, and

20 (3) if the hospital declines such reclassification,

21 administer the Social Security Act (other than sec22 tion 1886(d)(8)(D)) for fiscal year 1994 as if the

23 decision by the Review Board had not occurred.

Æ
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.                  

###### National Aeronautics and Space Administration

          - [Notice 01-022] 

# AGENCY:

National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Pub. L. 92-463, as amended, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration announces a forthcoming meeting of the NASA Advisory Council, Aero-Space Technology Advisory Committee, Aviation Operations Systems Subcommittee meeting. 

# DATES:

Wednesday, March 28, 2001, 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. and Thursday, March 29, 2001, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. 

# ADDRESSES:

National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Ames Research Center, Building 262, Room 100, Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

 Robert A. Jacobsen, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA 94035, 650/604-3743. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The meeting will be open to the public up to the seating capacity of the room. The agenda for the meeting is as follows:

—Aviation Operations Systems Program Review

—Aircraft Icing Research Project Review

—Human Automation Integration Research Project Review

—Human Error and Countermeasures Research Project Review

—Psychological/Physiological Stressors and Factors Research Project Review 

It is imperative that the meeting be held on these dates to accommodate the scheduling priorities of the key participants. 

Dated: February 6, 2001. 

Beth M. McCormick, 

Advisory Committee Management Officer, National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 

[FR Doc. 01-3478 Filed 2-9-01; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7510-01-U