alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §8875. Commissions of auctioneers

(a) The Secretary of the Navy may establish a scale of commissions to be paid to auctioneers employed to make sales of prize property. These commissions are in full satisfaction of expenses as well as services. The scale may in no case allow a commission in excess of—

(1) 1⁄2 of 1 percent on any amount exceeding $10,000 on the sale of a vessel; and

(2) 1 percent on any amount exceeding $10,000 on the sale of other prize property.

(b) If no such scale is established, auctioneers in prize causes shall be paid such compensation as the court considers just under the circumstances of each case.

(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 481, §7675; renumbered §8875, Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §807(d)(9), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1837.)

| Revised section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 7675 | 34 U.S.C. 1156. | R.S. 4650. |

The word "amount" is substituted for the word "sum".

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2018—Pub. L. 115–232 renumbered section 7675 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.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# 353rd Special Operations Group Collaborates with 36th Special Tactics Squadron to Open Wake Island Airfield

By Tech. Sgt. Kristine Dreyer353rd Special Operations Group Public Affairs

**WAKE ISLAND AIRFIELD -- **

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

More News/Articles
§ 558.4 Notice of information impacting eligibility and licensee's right to a hearing. ( a ) If, after the issuance of a gaming license pursuant to § 558.3, the Commission receives reliable information indicating that a key employee or a primary management official is not eligible for a license under § 556.5 of this chapter, the Commission shall notify the issuing tribe of the information.
( b ) Upon receipt of such notification under paragraph (a) of this section, a tribe shall immediately suspend the license and shall provide the licensee with written notice of suspension and proposed revocation.
( c ) A tribe shall notify the licensee of a time and a place for a hearing on the proposed revocation of a license.
( d ) The right to a revocation hearing shall vest upon receipt of a license or at such earlier time as is determined by tribal law, regulation, and/or policy.
( e ) After a revocation hearing, a tribe shall decide to revoke or to reinstate a gaming license. A tribe shall notify the Commission of its decision within 45 days of receiving notification from the Commission pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section.
[88 FR 55371, Aug. 15, 2023]
No. 47,947

#### State of Kansas, *Appellee,*v. Harold Duckworth, *Appellant.*

(549 P. 2d 554)

Opinion filed May 8, 1976.

*John J. Ambrosio,*assistant district defender, and *Donald W. Rupert,*legal intern, were on the brief for the appellant.

*Curt T. Schneider,*attorney general, *Gene M. Olander,*district attorney, and *Donald P. Morrison,*assistant district attorney, were on the brief for the appellee.

*Per Curiam:*

Harold Duckworth was convicted by a jury of the offense of aggravated battery. He was sentenced and now appeals.

Appellant first asserts insufficiency of evidence to support his conviction. The testimony shows he shot the unarmed victim three times at close range with a .22 caliber pistol, resulting in the victim’s complete paralysis from the neck down. Two of the shots were fired after appellant said, “I’m going to kill you,” and while the victim was trying to get away. This is sufficient to support the verdict that appellant was guilty of .aggravated battery, once the jury rejected appellant’s claim of self-defense as it was entitled to do under the evidence.

Appellant’s requested instruction on battery as a lesser included offense of aggravated battery was refused. Failure to instruct on a lesser included offense does not constitute error where the evidence negates a lesser degree of guilt or if it excludes a theory of guilt on the lesser offense *(State v. Cameron & Bentley,*216 Kan. 644, 533 P. 2d 1255). Here the uncontradicted evidence was that appellant shot his victim at close range with a pistol and there was no occasion to instruct on simple battery (see *State v. Schoenberger,*216 Kan. 464, 532 P. 2d 1085).

Appellant’s requested instruction on self-defense was refused by the trial court, which instead instructed the jury on the issue in the language of P. I. K. Criminal § 54.17. That instruction adequately and properly covered the issue *(State v. Weyer,*210 Kan. 721, 728, 504 P. 2d 178).

The judgment is affirmed.
#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. DOCK McKOY

No. 585A85

(Filed 3 April 1990)

ORDER

ON remand from the Supreme Court of the United States, and upon consideration of the motion to remand the case to the Superior Court, STANLY County, filed by defendant in this matter, the following order is entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

> Within 14 days after certification of this order, all parties shall file with this Court supplemental briefs, limited to the issues presented by the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States remanding the case to this Court, and the issue of whether this Court can engage in a harmless error analysis on the issues presented and, if so, whether the error in this case, if any, was harmless. See *Clemons v. Mississippi*(88-6873, U.S. Supreme Court, decided 28 March 1990).

> The parties may reply to opposing briefs so long as any such reply is filed in this Court on or before 30 April 1990.

> The case will be set for argument during the week of 14 May 1990.

> By order of the Court in conference, this 3rd day of April, 1990.

Whichard, J.

For the Court
-, :I 

# '

# 'IIN THE MATTER 

### OF 

### J.B.K.and 

### J.T.K.. 4 

# 11 I Youths in Xeed of Care. j 

# 11

/ / ORDER TO Si'BSTITtTTE 

### APPEXDJX

G~od cause appeanng, and counsel for the State ha1 1ng represented 

### I 10

# 1,that Appellant's counsel has no objection, 1 1

# 1 il 

### IS HEREBY ORDERED tlm counsel for the State prepare a copy of 12 the current Appendix of Appellant's 

### hnef \&it11the children's parents' names 

# 11 13 blacked out. 'The State Law Library is directed to substitute the altered copy 

# il 14 for the current Appendlx nou posted on this Court's web site. 

# II
I 

### I5 

### 1 16

# i DATED thls 

## ,& day of Febnary, 2004. / 

### l7 18 19 

# I
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 2113** 

ERIN POTTS , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,
v. ADP, INC
. , Defendant

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Charlotte
. Max O. Cogburn, Jr., District Judge. ( 3:13

- cv - 00344

- MOC

- DSC )

Submitted : April 27, 2015 Decided: May 1, 2015

Before MOTZ, DUNCAN , and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
.
Victoria Street Tolbert , LAW OFFICE OF VICTORIA STREET TOLBERT , Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Ted N. Kazaglis , Collin O ’ Connor Udell , JACKSON LEWIS PC , Cary, North Carolina , for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Erin Potts appeals the district court ’ s order granting summary judgment in favor of Potts’ s former employer, ADP, Inc., in Potts’ s employment discrimination action filed pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e

2000e

- 7 (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See Bala s v. Hunting ton Ingalls Indus., Inc. , 711 F.3d 401, 410 (4th Cir. 2013) (providing elements of Title VII retaliation claim); Anderson v. Westinghouse Savannah River
Co. , 40 6 F.3d 248, 268 (4th Cir. 2005) (prov id ing elements of Title VII failure

- to

- promote claim ); Cook v. CSX Transp. Corp. , 988 F.2d 507, 511 (4th Cir. 1993) (providing elements of Title VII disparate

- discipline claim). Accordingly, we affirm the district cour t’s order
. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
Exhibit 32.2

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 on Form 10-Q of The Knot, Inc. (the Company) for
the period ended June 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Richard Szefc, Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

| |     |                                                                                                                                                         
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | (1) | the Report
  fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
  Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                               
| |     |                                                                                                                                                         
| | (2) | the
  information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
  respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|                        |                          
|----------------------- | -------------------------
|                        | /s/ Richard
  Szefc      
|                        |                          
|                        | Richard
  Szefc          
|                        | Chief
  Financial Officer
|                        |                          
|Date: August
  14, 2006 |                          

---
## FIRST COURT OF APPEALS

INFORMATION SHEET BY COURT REPORTERS

You are expected to file the reporter’s record by the original due date . See Tex. R. App. P.35. If

a reporter determines that the due date may not be met, please advise the Clerk of the Court of

Appeals immediately in writing, stating the reason and the due date by which the record will be

filed. Generally speaking, for good cause shown, the Court will grant no more than two

extensions from the original record due date, each extension not to exceed 30 days in regular

appeals and 10 days in accelerated appeals for a total period not to exceed 60 days in regular

appeals and 20 days in accelerated appeals.

Appellate Case Number: Trial Court Case Number:

(1) Is there a Reporter's Record ? Y N

(2) Are you the only court reporter involved in this appeal? Y N

If not , please provide the names and addresses of all other court

reporters below.

(3) Has the appellant requested that the reporter’s record be prepared or

has the trial court ordered that the record be prepared ? Y N

(4) Please select from the following options:

A. The appellant has paid for the record.

B. The appellant has made arrangements to pay for the record

C. The appellant is appealing as indigent.

D. The appellant has not paid or made arrangements to pay for the

record and is not appealing as indigent.

(5) Extension ( fill out if extension is required for any reason other than payment )

I was unable to file the record in this appeal by _

_______ . I expect the record

in this appeal to be approximately

_______ pages. The record covers

_______ days of testimony. I believe that I can file the record by

_________ . I

ask that the court grant an ex tension until that time for filing the record.

Additional Comments:

_ __________________________________________

Court Reporter's Signature, Full Address, Email Address and Telephone Number:

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________
### §1507. Additional assistance

(a) Subject to the specific limitations stated elsewhere in this chapter the court, if recognition is granted, may provide additional assistance to a foreign representative under this title or under other laws of the United States.

(b) In determining whether to provide additional assistance under this title or under other laws of the United States, the court shall consider whether such additional assistance, consistent with the principles of comity, will reasonably assure—

(1) just treatment of all holders of claims against or interests in the debtor's property;

(2) protection of claim holders in the United States against prejudice and inconvenience in the processing of claims in such foreign proceeding;

(3) prevention of preferential or fraudulent dispositions of property of the debtor;

(4) distribution of proceeds of the debtor's property substantially in accordance with the order prescribed by this title; and

(5) if appropriate, the provision of an opportunity for a fresh start for the individual that such foreign proceeding concerns.

(Added Pub. L. 109–8, title VIII, §801(a), Apr. 20, 2005, 119 Stat. 136.)

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective 180 days after Apr. 20, 2005, and not applicable with respect to cases commenced under this title before such effective date, except as otherwise provided, see section 1501 of Pub. L. 109–8, set out as an Effective Date of 2005 Amendment note under section 101 of this title.
Exhibit 13.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



The undersigned, Keyan
Yan, the Chief Executive Officer of KBS FASHION GROUP LIMITED (the “Company”), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:



1.     The Company’s Annual Report
on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



2.     Information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
the undersigned has executed this statement this 2nd day of May, 2016.



| | /s/
    Keyan Yan            
| | -----------------------------
| | Keyan Yan                    
| | Chief Executive Officer      
| | (Principal Executive Officer)



A signed original of this written statement
required by Section 906 has been provided to KBS Fashion Group Limited and will be retained by KBS Fashion Group Limited and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



The forgoing certification is being furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being filed for purposes of Section
18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company,
whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Somsak Chivavibul,
certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period
covered by this report on Form 10-K of SLM Student Loan Trust 2012-3 (the Exchange Act periodic reports);

2. Based on my
knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary 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, all of the distribution, servicing
and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements required under this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as
disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer and administrator have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreement and administration agreement, as applicable, in all material respects; and

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on
assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this
report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K. In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information
provided to me by Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as indenture trustee.

Date: March 27, 2014



|                                                                     
|---------------------------------------------------------------------
|/S/ SOMSAK CHIVAVIBUL                                                
|Somsak Chivavibul                                                    
|President and Chief Financial Officer (Senior Securitization Officer)
|SLM Funding LLC
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                       5,786,381
<SECURITIES>                                95,757,239
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,573,222
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (280,927)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           103,636,738
<PP&E>                                      91,776,611
<DEPRECIATION>                             (3,970,591)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             280,273,603
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       21,477,517
<BONDS>                                    180,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       162,843
<OTHER-SE>                                  74,339,755
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               280,273,603
<SALES>                                      3,183,218
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,183,218
<CGS>                                        4,221,186
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                9,268,933
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,904,934
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          15,525,621
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (19,457,392)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (19,457,392)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (19,457,392)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.21)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.21)


</TABLE>
§ 292.7 What must be demonstrated to meet the “restored lands” exception? This section contains criteria for meeting the requirements of 25 U.S.C. 2719(b)(1)(B)(iii), known as the “restored lands” exception. Gaming may occur on newly acquired lands under this exception only when all of the following conditions in this section are met: ( a ) The tribe at one time was federally recognized, as evidenced by its meeting the criteria in § 292.8;
( b ) The tribe at some later time lost its government-to-government relationship by one of the means specified in § 292.9;
( c ) At a time after the tribe lost its government-to-government relationship, the tribe was restored to Federal recognition by one of the means specified in § 292.10; and
( d ) The newly acquired lands meet the criteria of “restored lands” in § 292.11.
Exhibit 32.1

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 Global Crossing Limited (the registrant) on Form
10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the report), I, John J. Legere, Chief Executive Officer, of the registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

(1) The report fully
complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information
contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the registrant.

Date: May 10, 2006



|                       
|-----------------------
|                       
|/S/    JOHN J.
LEGERE  
|John J. Legere         
|Chief Executive Officer