alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §8588. Regulations

The Secretary of the Navy shall prescribe regulations for the administration of this chapter.

(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 441, §7088; renumbered §8588, Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §807(c)(1), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1836.)

| Revised section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 7088 | 34 U.S.C. 1073e. | Jan. 16, 1936, ch. 3, §6, 49 Stat. 1093. |

The appropriations authorization in the second sentence of the source is omitted as unnecessary.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2018—Pub. L. 115–232 renumbered section 7088 of this title as this section.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 2018 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 115–232 effective Feb. 1, 2019, with provision for the coordination of amendments and special rule for certain redesignations, see section 800 of Pub. L. 115–232, set out as a note preceding section 3001 of this title.
# C_2013213EN.01003601.xml

| 26.7.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 213/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.7.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 213/36

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production of agricultural products and amending Regulation (EC) No 70/2001

2013/C 213/04

Aid No: SA.36946 (13/XA)

Member State: Czech Republic

Region: Czech Republic

Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving an individual aid: Finanční podpora pojištění

Legal basis:

| 1) | § 2da zákona č. 252/1997 Sb., o zemědělství, ve znění pozdějších předpisů, |
| --- | --- |

1)

§ 2da zákona č. 252/1997 Sb., o zemědělství, ve znění pozdějších předpisů,

| 2) | Zásady pro poskytování finanční podpory pojištění PGRLF, a.s. |
| --- | --- |

2)

Zásady pro poskytování finanční podpory pojištění PGRLF, a.s.

Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company: Annual overall amount of the budget planned under the scheme: CZK 500,00 (in millions)

Maximum aid intensity: 50,00 %

Duration of scheme or individual aid award: 1.1.2014-31.12.2020

Objective of aid: Insurance premiums (Art. 12 of Reg. (EC) No 1857/2006)

Sector(s) concerned: Crop and animal production, hunting and related service activities

Name and address of the granting authority: Podpůrný a garanční rolnický a lesnický fond, a.s.

Za Poříčskou branou 252/6, 186 00 Praha 8 — Karlín, Česká republika

Website: http://www.pgrlf.cz/pojisteni/podpora.php

Other information: —

Aid No: SA.36963 (13/XA)

Member State: Germany

Region: DEUTSCHLAND

Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving an individual aid: Bund: Grundsätze für eine nationale Rahmenrichtlinie zur Gewährung staatlicher Zuwendungen zur Bewältigung von durch Naturkatastrophen oder widrige Witterungsverhältnisse verursachte Schäden in der Landwirtschaft

Legal basis: Grundsätze für eine nationale Rahmenrichtlinie zur Gewährung staatlicher Zuwendungen zur Bewältigung von durch Naturkatastrophen oder widrige Witterungsverhältnisse verursachte Schäden in der Landwirtschaft

Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company: Annual overall amount of the budget planned under the scheme: EUR 300,00 (in millions)

Maximum aid intensity: 90,00 %

Duration of scheme or individual aid award: 8.7.2013-30.6.2014

Objective of aid: Adverse climatic events (Art. 11 of Reg. (EC) No 1857/2006)

Sector(s) concerned: Crop and animal production, hunting and related service activities

Name and address of the granting authority: jeweils zuständige Landesbehörden

siehe Anlage

Website: http://www.bmelv.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/Landwirtschaft/Foerderung/Beihilfe-Naturereignisse.pdf?__blob=publicationFile

Other information: —

---
### §626. Acceptance of promotions; oath of office

(a) An officer who is appointed to a higher grade under section 624 of this title is considered to have accepted such appointment on the date on which the appointment is made unless he expressly declines the appointment.

(b) An officer who has served continuously since he subscribed to the oath of office prescribed in section 3331 of title 5 is not required to take a new oath upon appointment to a higher grade under section 624 of this title.

(Added Pub. L. 96–513, title I, §105, Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 2858.)

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section effective Sept. 15, 1981, but the authority to prescribe regulations under this section effective on Dec. 12, 1980, see section 701 of Pub. L. 96–513, set out as an Effective Date of 1980 Amendment note under section 101 of this title.
# Report_table

# Readme

# Water_Source

# Water_Type
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 23-0206

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

KATHAN DEVERNON JOHNSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

GRANT

Pursuant to authority granted under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1), the 

Appellant is given an extension of time until July 12, 2023, to prepare, 

file, and serve the Appellant’s opening brief.

Electronically signed by:

Bowen Greenwood

Clerk of the Supreme Court

June 5 2023

06/05/2023

Case Number: DA 23-0206
§ 162.361 When will an amendment, assignment, sublease, or leasehold mortgage of a residential lease be effective? ( a ) An amendment, assignment, sublease, or leasehold mortgage of a residential lease will be effective when approved, even if an appeal is filed under part 2 of this chapter, except: ( 1 ) If the amendment or sublease was deemed approved under § 162.347(b) or § 162.355(b), the amendment or sublease becomes effective 45 days from the date the parties mailed or delivered the document to us for our review; and
( 2 ) An assignment that does not require our approval under § 162.349(b) or a sublease that does not require our approval under § 162.353(b) becomes effective on the effective date specified in the assignment or sublease. If the assignment or sublease does not specify the effective date, it becomes effective upon execution by the parties.
( b ) We will provide copies of approved documents to the party requesting approval, to the tribe for tribal land, and upon request, to other parties to the lease document.
§ 179.5 What documents will BIA use to record termination of a life estate? The Agency will file a copy of the relinquishment of the interest or death certificate with the BIA Land Title and Records Office for recording upon receipt of one of the following: ( a ) The life estate holder's relinquishment of an interest in trust or restricted property; or
( b ) Notice of death of a person who is the measuring life for the life estate in trust or restricted property.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-6611

LARRY L. BUSH,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

JACK KAVANAUGH, Commissioner; RONALD

HUTCHINSON, Warden; SEWALL B. SMITH, Warden;

BERNARD FORD, Captain; JAKE SUTTON, Sergeant;

R. EULISS, Captain,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (CA-02-

3780-AMD)

Submitted: July 16, 2003 Decided: August 12, 2003

Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Larry L. Bush, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney

General, Stephanie Judith Lane Weber, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY

GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Larry L. Bush seeks to appeal an order denying the motion for

recusal of the district judge. This court may exercise jurisdiction

only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain

interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); Fed.

R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S.

541 (1949). The order Bush seeks to appeal is neither a final order

nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly,

we deny the motions for preparation of transcript at government

expense and dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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.

DISMISSED
##### 



Exhibit 32.0
 CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
with Respect to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A
for the Period Ended June 30, 2006
  1.
    
    The Companys quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A for the period ended June 30, 2006, (the Form
10-Q/A) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act); and2.
    
    Information contained in the Form 10-Q/A fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Date: November 17, 2006
    
    /s/ Thomas S. WuThomas S. WuChairman, President andChief Executive OfficerDate: November 17, 2006
    
    /s/ Dennis WuDennis WuDirector, Executive Vice President andChief Financial Officer
§ 11.442 Riot; failure to disperse. ( a ) A person is guilty of riot, a misdemeanor, if he or she participates with two or more others in a course of disorderly conduct: ( 1 ) With purpose to commit or facilitate the commission of a felony or misdemeanor; or
( 2 ) With purpose to prevent or coerce official action; or
( 3 ) When the actor or any other participant to the knowledge of the actor uses or plans to use a firearm or other deadly weapon.
( b ) Where three or more persons are participating in a course of disorderly conduct likely to cause substantial harm or serious inconvenience, a law enforcement officer may order the participants and others in the immediate vicinity to disperse. A person who refuses or knowingly fails to obey such an order commits a misdemeanor.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-6297

JEFFREY ALLEN THOMAS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

S. K. YOUNG,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, District Judge.

(CA-04-390-7-GEC)

Submitted: June 30, 2005 Decided: July 27, 2005

Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jeffrey Allen Thomas, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Christopher

Galanides, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond,

Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Jeffrey Allen Thomas, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal

the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed

under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the

final order in a § 2254 proceeding unless a circuit justice or

judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue

for claims addressed by a district court absent “a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find both that the

district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural rulings by

the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v.

Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 338 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S.

473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001).

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Thomas

has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny the

motions for appointment of counsel and to proceed at government

expense, deny a certificate of appealability, and dismiss the

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.

DISMISSED
I

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 985

To amend title 49, United States Code, concerning the treatment of certain

aircraft as public aircraft.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 4, 1999

Mr. GALLEGLY (for himself, Mr. METCALF, Mr. ROHRABACHER, Mrs.

TAUSCHER, Mr. HERGER, Mrs. THURMAN, Mr. NETHERCUTT, Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi, Mr. FOLEY, Mr. OXLEY, Mr. WALSH, Mr. ENGLISH,

Mr. HOBSON, Ms. DANNER, Mr. BILBRAY, Mr. CUNNINGHAM, Mr.

MCKEON, Mr. SMITH of Washington, Mr. BOYD, and Mr. SAXTON) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

A BILL

To amend title 49, United States Code, concerning the

treatment of certain aircraft as public aircraft.

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 ‘‘Public Services Avia5 tion Act of 1999’’.

6 SEC. 2. PUBLIC AIRCRAFT DEFINED.

7 Section 40102(a)(37) of title 49, United States Code,

8 is amended—
2

•HR 985 IH

1 (1) in subparagraph (B)(ii)(I)—

2 (A) by inserting ‘‘, administration, or sup3 port’’ after ‘‘performance’’; and

4 (B) by striking ‘‘such as’’ and inserting

5 ‘‘such as, but not limited to, public safety,’’;

6 and

7 (2) by striking the last sentence and inserting

8 the following:

9 ‘‘A government-owned aircraft shall be considered to

10 be a public aircraft for the purposes of this part if

11 the aircraft is operated in the performance of a gov12 ernmental function (including any function referred

13 to in subparagraph (B)(ii)(I)) by a unit of govern14 ment on behalf of another unit of government pursu15 ant to a cost reimbursement agreement between the

16 units of government. In this paragraph, the term

17 ‘commercial purposes’ does not include the operation

18 of an aircraft pursuant to a cost reimbursement

19 agreement.’’.

Æ
### §276. Support not to affect adversely military preparedness

Support (including the provision of any equipment or facility or the assignment or detail of any personnel) may not be provided to any civilian law enforcement official under this chapter if the provision of such support will adversely affect the military preparedness of the United States. The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to ensure that the provision of any such support does not adversely affect the military preparedness of the United States.

(Added Pub. L. 97–86, title, IX, §905(a)(1), Dec. 1, 1981, 95 Stat. 1116, §376; amended Pub. L. 100–456, div. A, title XI, §1104(a), Sept. 29, 1988, 102 Stat. 2045; renumbered §276, Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title XII, §1241(a)(2), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2497.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 276, acts Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 13; Apr. 21, 1987, Pub. L. 100–26, §7(k)(4), 101 Stat. 284, related to maintenance of mobilization forces, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title XVI, §§1661(a)(2)(A), 1691, Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2979, 3026, effective Dec. 1, 1994. See section 10207 of this title.

#### Amendments

2016—Pub. L. 114–328 renumbered section 376 of this title as this section.

1988—Pub. L. 100–456 substituted "Support" for "Assistance" in section catchline and amended text generally. Prior to amendment, text read as follows: "Assistance (including the provision of any equipment or facility or the assignment of any personnel) may not be provided to any civilian law enforcement official under this chapter if the provision of such assistance will adversely affect the military preparedness of the United States. The Secretary of Defense shall issue such regulations as may be necessary to insure that the provision of any such assistance does not adversely affect the military preparedness of the United States."
**Exhibit 35.2**

 

**Servicer Compliance Statement of Deere Credit Services, Inc.**

 

I, James A. Israel, President of Deere Credit Services, Inc., certify:

 

A review of Deere Credit Services, Inc.’s activities for the period from March 1, 2012 (the date of issuance of the John Deere Owner Trust 2012 transaction subject to the requirements of Regulation AB) through October 31, 2012 (the “Reporting Period”) and of Deere Credit Services, Inc.’s performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of March 1, 2012 among John Deere Capital Corporation, John Deere Receivables, Inc. and John Deere Owner Trust 2012 has been made under my supervision, and to the best of my knowledge based on such review, Deere Credit Services, Inc. has fulfilled all its obligations under all relevant agreements in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

 
| Date: January 11, 2013 | Deere   Credit Services, Inc. |
|------------------------|-------------------------------|
|                   |                          |   |
|                   |                          |   |
|                   |                          |   |
|                   | By                            | */s/ James A. Israel* |   |
|                   |                          |   |
|                   |                          | James   A. Israel |
|                   |                          |   |
|                   |                          | President |

 

----
§ 2.503 May an appeal be dismissed without a decision on the merits? Yes, the reviewing official may dismiss an appeal without a decision on the merits when: ( a ) You are late in filing your appeal;
( b ) You lack standing because you do not meet the requirements of § 2.200 for bringing an appeal;
( c ) You have withdrawn the appeal;
( d ) You have failed to pay a required appeal bond;
( e ) The reviewing official lacks the authority to grant the requested relief;
( f ) If you are represented and your representative does not meet the standards established in 43 CFR part 1 related to eligibility to practice before the Department, and you have failed to substitute yourself or an eligible representative after being given an opportunity to do so; or
( g ) The reviewing official determines there are other circumstances that warrant a dismissal and explains those circumstances in the dismissal order.
§ 162.212 When will the BIA advertise Indian land for agricultural leases? ( a ) We will generally advertise Indian land for agricultural leasing: ( 1 ) At the request of the Indian landowners; or
( 2 ) Before we grant a lease under § 162.209(b) of this subpart.
( b ) Advertisements will provide prospective tenants with notice of any superseding tribal laws and leasing policies that have been made applicable to the land under §§ 162.109 and 162.203 of this part, along with certain standard terms and conditions to be included in the lease. Advertisements will prohibit tenant preferences, and bidders at lease sales will not be afforded any preference, unless a preference in favor of individual Indians is required by a superseding tribal law or leasing policy.
( c ) Advertisements will require sealed bids, and they may also provide for further competitive bidding among the prospective tenants at the conclusion of the bid opening. Competitive bidding should be supported, at a minimum, by a market study or rent survey that is consistent with USPAP.
# C_2014153EN.01002101.xml

| 21.5.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 153/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.5.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 153/21

---

Corrigendum to Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of the Directive 2006/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2006 on machinery, and amending Directive 95/16/EC (recast)

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 110 of 11 April 2014
  )

Official Journal of the European Union C 110 of 11 April 2014

(2014/C 153/08)

On page 63:

for:

for:

| ‘CEN | EN 16252:2012
  Machines for compacting waste materials or recyclable fractions — Horizontal baling presses — Safety requirements | 5.4.2013’ | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| |

‘CEN

EN 16252:2012

Machines for compacting waste materials or recyclable fractions — Horizontal baling presses — Safety requirements

5.4.2013’

read:

read:

| ‘CEN | EN 16252:2012
  Machines for compacting waste materials or recyclable fractions — Horizontal baling presses — Safety requirements | 5.4.2013 | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| CEN | EN 16307-1:2013
  Industrial trucks — Safety requirements and verification — Part 1: Supplementary requirements for self-propelled industrial trucks, other than driverless trucks, variable-reach trucks and burden-carrier trucks | 5.4.2013’ | | |
| |

‘CEN

EN 16252:2012

Machines for compacting waste materials or recyclable fractions — Horizontal baling presses — Safety requirements

5.4.2013

CEN

EN 16307-1:2013

Industrial trucks — Safety requirements and verification — Part 1: Supplementary requirements for self-propelled industrial trucks, other than driverless trucks, variable-reach trucks and burden-carrier trucks

5.4.2013’

---
H. Res. 385

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

November 18, 1999.

Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it

shall be in order without intervention of any point of order

to consider in the House the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 82)

making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year

2000, and for other purposes. The joint resolution shall be

considered as read for amendment. The previous question

shall be considered as ordered on the joint resolution to final

passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of

debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and

ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations; and (2) one motion to recommit.

SEC. 2. Upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be

in order without intervention of any point of order to consider

in the House the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 83) making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2000, and

for other purposes. The joint resolution shall be considered

as read for amendment. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the joint resolution to final passage
2

•HRES 385 EH

without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate

equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking

minority member of the Committee on Appropriations; and

(2) one motion to recommit.

Attest:

Clerk.
#### Robert J. KOSHLAND, as Executor of the Last Will and Testament of Corinne S. Koshland, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.

No. 13857.

United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.

Nov. 19, 1954.

Willard L. Ellis, Harold L. Levy, San Francisco, Cal., for petitioner.

H. Brian Holland, Asst. Atty. Gen., Ellis N. Slack, Joseph F. Goetten, Loring M. Post, Sp. Assts. to Atty. Gen., Charles W. Davis, Chief Counsel, Washington, D. C., Bureau of Internal Revenue, for respondent.

Before HEALY and ORR, Circuit Judges, and WIIG, District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the Tax Court is affirmed for the reasons stated in its opinion, 19 T.C. 860. See, also United States v. Wharton, 5 Cir., 207 F.2d 526.