alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
###### Editorial Note on Part 1240

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1240 appear at 68 FR 9846, Feb. 28, 2003, and at 68 FR 10355, Mar. 3, 2003.

#### § 1240.15 Appeals.

Pursuant to 8 CFR part 1003, an appeal shall lie from a decision of an immigration judge to the Board of Immigration Appeals, except that no appeal shall lie from an order of removal entered in absentia. The procedures regarding the filing of a Form EOIR 26, Notice of Appeal, fees, and briefs are set forth in §§ 1003.3, 1003.31, and 1003.38 of this chapter. An appeal shall be filed within 30 calendar days after the mailing of a written decision, the stating of an oral decision, or the service of a summary decision. The filing date is defined as the date of receipt of the Notice of Appeal by the Board of Immigration Appeals. The reasons for the appeal shall be stated in the Notice of Appeal in accordance with the provisions of § 1003.3(b) of this chapter. Failure to do so may constitute a ground for dismissal of the appeal by the Board pursuant to § 1003.1(d)(2) of this chapter.

[62 FR 10367, Mar. 6, 1997, as amended at 66 FR 6446, Jan. 22, 2001]
### §590z–6. Disposition of receipts from repayment contracts and project operations

All payments made to the United States under repayment contracts on account of reimbursable construction costs, including penalties collected for delinquencies in such payments, and all other receipts from project operations pursuant to sections 590z–2 and 590z–7 of this title shall be covered into the Treasury to the credit of miscellaneous receipts. Charges collected during the development period of a project under section 590z–2(c)(1) of this title, excepting such amounts thereof as may be credited to reimbursable construction costs, and charges collected for the operation and maintenance of a project under section 590z–2(c)(2) of this title shall be available for expenditure for operation and maintenance of said project in like manner as if said funds had been specifically appropriated for said purposes.

(Aug. 11, 1939, ch. 717, §8, as added Oct. 14, 1940, ch. 861, 54 Stat. 1124.)
#### Lyman K. Eddy, appellee, v. James Kimerer et al., appellants.

Filed March 20, 1901.

No. 9,421.

1. Taxes Precede All Other Liens. Taxes upon land, whenever levied, take precedence of all other liens.

3. Value of Judgment Debtor’s Interest Equals Gross Value of Land Minus Prior Liens. Within the meaning of the appraisement law, the value of a judgment debtor’s interest in land about to be sold is the difference between the gross value and the amount ■ of all liens prior to the one for the satisfaction of which the sale is to be made.

3. Objections to Confirmation: Scope of Inquiry. On the hearing of objections to the confirmation of a judicial sale the court will *499not inquire whether the person designated in the decree to make the sale is an agent or attorney of the creditor, unless fraud or misconduct in making the appraisement or sale is alleged.

4. Decree of Foreclosure: Collateral Attack. If a decree of foreclosure is by its terms to be executed by a person disqualified by interest from making the sale, the party complaining should assail the decree directly and not by motion to vacate the sale.

Appeal from the district court for Lancaster county. Heard below before Holmes, J.

*Affirmed.*

*Wolfenlarger & Williams,*for appellants.

*D. M. Yinsonhaler, contra.*

.Per Curiam.

This is an appeal from an order of the district court for Lancaster county confirming a sale of real estate made in pursuance of a decree of foreclosure. The objection to the appraisement, grounded on the fact that all taxes lawfully charged against the mortgaged premises were deducted from the gross value thereof, is manifestly without merit. Taxes upon land, whenever levied, take precedence of all other liens. The value of appellants’ interest in the property sold was, within the meaning of the appraisement law, the difference between its gross value and the amount of the county, city and other taxes charged against it. A right conclusion having been reached by the appraisers, we will not inquire into the character of the evidence upon which they relied. *Sessions v. Irwin, 8*Nebr., 5; *Stratton v. Reisdorph,*35 Nebr., 314. The contention that the sale should have been set aside because the special master by whom it was made had acted as attorney for the plaintiff can not be sustained. This objection was, in substance, a collateral attack on the decree, and for that reason properly overruled. *State Nat. Bank v. Scofield,*9 Nebr., 499; *Beatrice Paper Co. v. Beloit Iron Works,*46 Nebr., 900; *Hoover v. Hale,*56 Nebr., 67. The order of confirmation is

Affirmed,.
###### Editorial Note on Part 1208

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1208 appear at 68 FR 9846, Feb. 28, 2003, and at 68 FR 10352, Mar. 5, 2003.

#### § 1208.19 [Reserved]
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

RICHMOND DIVISION

In Re: Theodore Malcolm Dixon

Brenda Washington Dixon

CASE NO. 17-30462-KLP

Chapter 13

)

)

11005 Spring Meadow Blvd.

Fredericksburg, VA 22407

Debtor Address(es):

Last four digits of Social Security No(s).: 7076

1708

MOTION TO DISMISS, NOTICE OF MOTION AND NOTICE OF THE HEARING

NOW COMES the Chapter 13 Trustee and moves this Court to dismiss this case as provided 

in 11 U.S.C. 1307(c)(6) as the Debtor(s) are in default in making the payments under the plan.

Carl M. Bates, Chapter 13 Trustee, has filed papers with the court to dismiss this case.

Your rights may be affected. You should read these papers carefully and discuss them 

with your attorney, if you have one in this bankruptcy case. (If you do not have an attorney, 

you may wish to consult one.)

If you do not want the court to grant the relief sought in the motion, or if you want the court to 

consider your views on the motion, then on or before seven (7) days before the date of the hearing, you 

or your attorney must:

 X File with the court, at the address shown below, a written request for a hearing [or a written 

response pursuant to Local Bankruptcy Rule 9013-1(H)]. If you mail your request for hearing (or 

response) to the court for filing, you must mail it early enough so the court will receive it on or before 

the date stated above.

Clerk of Court

United States Bankruptcy Court

701 East Broad Street, Suite 4000

Richmond, VA 23219

Carl M. Bates

Chapter 13 Trustee

P.O. Box 1819

Richmond, VA 23218

(804)237-6800

VSBN 27815

Case 17-30462-KLP Doc 36 Filed 06/19/18 Entered 06/19/18 10:23:30 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 2
You must also mail a copy to:

Carl M. Bates, Chapter 13 Trustee

Chapter 13 Trustee

P.O. Box 1819

Richmond, VA 23218

 _ Attend a hearing to be scheduled at a later date. You will receive separate notice of hearing. If 

no timely response has been filed opposing the relief requested, the court may grant the relief 

without holding a hearing.

 X Attend the hearing on the motion scheduled to be held on July 25, 2018 at 9:00 AM at United 

States Bankruptcy Court, 701 East Broad Street, Richmond, VA 23219, Room 5100.

If you or your attorney do not take these steps, the court may decide that you do not oppose 

the relief sought in the motion and may enter an order granting that relief.

Dated: June 18, 2018 /s/ Carl M. Bates

Carl M. Bates

Chapter 13 Trustee

P.O. Box 1819

Richmond, VA 23218

VSBN 27815

Certificate of Service

I hereby certify that I have this 18th day of June, 2018, by mail, hand or electronically delivered a true 

copy of the foregoing Notice of Motion and Motion to the debtor(s) Theodore Malcolm Dixon and 

Brenda Washington Dixon, 11005 Spring Meadow Blvd., Fredericksburg, VA 22407 and 

debtor(s) attorney, MARTIN C. CONWAY, ESQUIRE, via e-mail: 

mconway@conwaylawpc.com.

/s/ Carl M. Bates

Carl M. Bates

Chapter 13 Trustee

Carl M. Bates

Chapter 13 Trustee

P.O. Box 1819

Richmond, VA 23218

(804)237-6800

VSBN 27815

Case 17-30462-KLP Doc 36 Filed 06/19/18 Entered 06/19/18 10:23:30 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 2
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6819

WAY’LON LEVAR HARRIS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry C. Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CA-01-726-2) Submitted: July 18, 2002 Decided: July 25, 2002 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Way’Lon Levar Harris, Appellant Pro Se. Robert H. Anderson, III, 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: Way’Lon Levar Harris seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2002). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Harris v. Angelone , No. CA-01- 726-2 (E.D. Va. filed May 13, 2002; entered May 14, 2002). 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
125 STAT. 214 PUBLIC LAW 112–12—APR. 25, 2011 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—S.J. Res. 8: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 157 (2011): 

Mar. 15, considered and passed Senate. 

Apr. 12, considered and passed House. 

Æ 

Public Law 112–12 

112th Congress 

Joint Resolution 

Providing for the appointment of Stephen M. Case as a citizen regent of the 

Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution. 

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

United States of America in Congress assembled, That, in accordance with section 5581 of the Revised Statutes (20 U.S.C. 43), 

the vacancy on the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution, 

in the class other than Members of Congress, occurring by reason 

of the resignation of Phillip Frost of Florida is filled by the appointment of Stephen M. Case of Virginia. The appointment is for a 

term of 6 years, effective on the date of enactment of this joint 

resolution. 

Approved April 25, 2011. 

Effective date. 

Apr. 25, 2011 

[S.J. Res. 8] 


ccoleman on DSK8P6SHH1PROD with PUBLIC LAWS
### SUBCHAPTER I—PURPOSES AND POLICY
§ 104.6 Remedial action, voluntary action, and self-evaluation. ( a ) *Remedial action.* ( 1 ) If the Assistant Secretary finds that a recipient has discriminated against persons on the basis of handicap in violation of section 504 or this part, the recipient shall take such remedial action as the Assistant Secretary deems necessary to overcome the effects of the discrimination.
( 2 ) Where a recipient is found to have discriminated against persons on the basis of handicap in violation of section 504 or this part and where another recipient exercises control over the recipient that has discriminated, the Assistant Secretary, where appropriate, may require either or both recipients to take remedial action.
( 3 ) The Assistant Secretary may, where necessary to overcome the effects of discrimination in violation of section 504 or this part, require a recipient to take remedial action ( i ) with respect to handicapped persons who are no longer participants in the recipient's program or activity but who were participants in the program or activity when such discrimination occurred or
( ii ) with respect to handicapped persons who would have been participants in the program or activity had the discrimination not occurred.
( b ) *Voluntary action.* A recipient may take steps, in addition to any action that is required by this part, to overcome the effects of conditions that resulted in limited participation in the recipient's program or activity by qualified handicapped persons.
( c ) *Self-evaluation.* ( 1 ) A recipient shall, within one year of the effective date of this part: ( i ) Evaluate, with the assistance of interested persons, including handicapped persons or organizations representing handicapped persons, its current policies and practices and the effects thereof that do not or may not meet the requirements of this part;
( ii ) Modify, after consultation with interested persons, including handicapped persons or organizations representing handicapped persons, any policies and practices that do not meet the requirements of this part; and
( iii ) Take, after consultation with interested persons, including handicapped persons or organizations representing handicapped persons, appropriate remedial steps to eliminate the effects of any discrimination that resulted from adherence to these policies and practices.
( 2 ) A recipient that employs fifteen or more persons shall, for at least three years following completion of the evaluation required under paragraph (c)(1) of this section, maintain on file, make available for public inspection, and provide to the Assistant Secretary upon request: ( i ) A list of the interested persons consulted,
( ii ) A description of areas examined and any problems identified, and
( iii ) A description of any modifications made and of any remedial steps taken.
[45 FR 30936, May 9, 1980, as amended at 65 FR 68054, Nov. 13, 2000]
### §8211. Nonapplicability of Federal Advisory Committee Act

The Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) 1 shall not apply to—

(1) the Board; or

(2) any Partnership.

(Pub. L. 116–188, title II, §211, Oct. 30, 2020, 134 Stat. 937.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Federal Advisory Committee Act, referred to in text, is Pub. L. 92–463, Oct. 6, 1972, 86 Stat. 770, which was set out in the Appendix to Title 5, Government Organization and Employees, and was substantially repealed and restated in chapter 10 (§1001 et seq.) of Title 5 by Pub. L. 117–286, §§3(a), 7, Dec. 27, 2022, 136 Stat. 4197, 4361. For disposition of sections of the Act into chapter 10 of Title 5, see Disposition Table preceding section 101 of Title 5.

1 See References in Text note below.
Filed by Automated Filing Services Inc. (604) 609-0244 - Fox Petroleum Inc. - Exhibit 10.10






AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 

THIS AGREEMENT made the 19th day of October, 2007.


BETWEEN: 

FOX PETROLEUM INC., a company
incorporated pursuant to 
the laws of the State of Nevada, with an office at
64 Knightsbridge, 
London SW1X 7JF 

(the “Employer”) 

OF THE FIRST PART 

AND: 

RICHARD MOORE, of 1115 Finchley
Road, London, NW11 
OQD 

(the “Executive”) 

OF THE SECOND PART 

WHEREAS: 

A. The Employer has employed the Executive as President and
Chief Executive Officer of the Employer since June 8, 2007; 

B. The Employer and the Executive have entered into an
Employment Agreement dated June 8, 2007 with respect to the terms of the
Executive’s employment with the Employer (the “Employment Agreement”); 

C. The Employer and the Executive wish to amend the terms of
the Employment Agreement as hereinafter set out. 

NOW THEREFORE, THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSETH that in consideration
of the mutual covenants herein contained, and for other good and valuable
consideration (the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged), the
parties hereto agree as follows: 

	1. 	COMPENSATION 


1.1      The Employer and the
Executive agree that Section 2.1 of the Employment Agreement is hereby deleted
and the following substituted therefor: 




- 2 - 

		
      “2.1 
	 Salary and Work Commitment
	 	 
		
      The Employer will pay to the Executive a salary of ₤9,000
      per month, payable in ₤4,500 bi-monthly installments, in arrears, subject
      to all required tax withholdings, statutory and other deductions (“Base
      Salary”) commencing November 1, 2007. The Executive will be required to
      provide the Duties to the Employer a minimum of five (5) days per week
      (the “Time Commitment”).”

	 	 
	2. 	
      BALANCE OF TERMS

	 	 
		
      All other terms of the Employment Agreement shall remain
      in full force and effect.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the parties hereto have executed this
Amendment Agreement as of the date first written above. 

FOX PETROLEUM INC. 

	Per: 	/s/ Alexander Craven	 
	 	Authorized Signatory 	 



	SIGNED, SEALED and DELIVERED by 	) 	  
	RICHARD MOORE in the presence of: 	) 	  
	  	) 	  
	/s/ J. Brown	) 	  
	Signature 	) 	  
	J. Brown	) 	/s/ Richard
      Moore 
	Print Name 	) 	RICHARD MOORE 
	Templar House, Templar	) 	  
	Address 	) 	  
	Court, York, 4023 3YS	) 	  
	  	) 	  
	Property Manager	) 	  
	Occupation 	)
Q UE S T ION S T O A S K Y OUR S E L F A B OU T 

MAKING REGULAR PHYSICAL 

ACTIVITY A HABIT

1. The following is one type of exercise or physical activity that 

will be easy for me to start with, or easy for me to do more of. 

2. What results do I hope to get from this new or increased 

exercise/activity?

3. To start off, how many times a week can I easily do this new 

or increased exercise/activity? 

4. To start off, how long will each exercise/activity session be? 

5. Where are the easiest places for me to do this exercise/

activity? 
6. Will I exercise alone, with a trainer, with a buddy or in 

a class?

7. To vary my routine, what other exercises/activities will 

I gradually add?

8. What is one way I will increase my effort over time?

9. If I have to stop exercising for any reason, how will I make 

sure I start again? (See Staying Motivated to Exercise: 

Tips for Older Adults for tips on starting to exercise again 

after a break.)

10. When will I begin moving more? Today? Tomorrow? 

Next week?
### §695f. Construction, etc., authorized by section 695e as not reimbursable or returnable under reclamation laws

The cost of investigation, planning, and construction of the works and the delivery of water as authorized in section 695e of this title shall not be reimbursable or returnable under the Federal reclamation laws (Act of June 17, 1902, 32 Stat. 388, and the Acts amendatory thereof and supplementary thereto).

(Aug. 27, 1954, ch. 1012, §3, 68 Stat. 879.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Act of June 17, 1902, referred to in text, is act June 17, 1902, ch. 1093, 32 Stat. 388, popularly known as the Reclamation Act, which is classified generally to chapter 12 (§371 et seq.) of Title 43, Public Lands. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 371 of Title 43 and Tables.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 21
- 0467 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. ADAM JOSEPH HEITKEMPER ,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including April 1, 2022, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brie f on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

February 24 2022

02/24/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0467
Mr. Kevin D. Schlemmer 

Chief, Essential Air Service and Domestic Analysis Division 

United States Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Dear Kevin, 

SUN AIR EXPRESS 

3201 Griffin Road 

Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33312 

Tel: 954-660-9865 

Fax: 954-894-0367 

October 2, 2014 

As you may be aware, we have been working closely with the Lancaster, P A community with respect to developing 

air service to become more sustainable on a long term basis and match it more closely to their needs. 

Together, we have concluded that the community would be best served by shifting some or all of the existing EAS 

flight frequencies from lAD to Pittsburgh International Airport. There is significant interest among the local 

community to see PIT service reinstated, we have heard numerous similar comments from Western Pennsylvania 

communities about flights from there to LNS, and the demographic analyses suggest it can be successful. There are 

a number of communities in Eastern Pennsylvania that have lost nonstop service to PIT, and LNS has the potential 

to fill at least a portion of that void. 

We request the Department's approval in establishing PIT as an authorized EAS destination from LNS, in addition 

to lAD. No change to the existing per-departure EAS subsidy level is being requested. We are prepared to begin a 

transition in the late October/early November time frame, and of course would ensure that any passenger itineraries 

already booked beyond that point are either re-accommodated or refunded, based upon the passengers' interests. 

Thank you for your assistance, and we look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convienence. 

Sincerely, 

Vcwi.dt f. Hetekett 

David F. Hackett 

Chief Executive 

Sun Air Express, LLC 

Your Personal Airline
§ 59.3 Applicability. ( a ) The guidelines set forth in this part apply, pursuant to section 201 of the Privacy Protection Act of 1980 (Sec. 201, Pub. L. 96-440, 94 Stat. 1879, (42 U.S.C. 2000aa-11)), to the procedures used by any federal officer or employee, in connection with the investigation or prosecution of a criminal offense, to obtain documentary materials in the private possession of a disinterested third party.
( b ) The guidelines set forth in this part do not apply to: ( 1 ) Audits, examinations, or regulatory, compliance, or administrative inspections or searches pursuant to federal statute or the terms of a federal contract;
( 2 ) The conduct of foreign intelligence or counterintelligence activities by a government authority pursuant to otherwise applicable law;
( 3 ) The conduct, pursuant to otherwise applicable law, of searches and seizures at the borders of, or at international points of entry into, the United States in order to enforce the customs laws of the United States;
( 4 ) Governmental access to documentary materials for which valid consent has been obtained; or
( 5 ) Methods of obtaining documentary materials whose location is known but which have been abandoned or which cannot be obtained through subpoena or request because they are in the possession of a person whose identity is unknown and cannot with reasonable effort be ascertained.
( c ) The use of search and seizure to obtain documentary materials which are believed to be possessed for the purpose of disseminating to the public a book, newspaper, broadcast, or other form of public communication is subject to title I of the Privacy Protection Act of 1980 (Sec. 101, *et seq.,* Pub. L. 96-440, 94 Stat. 1879 (42 U.S.C. 2000aa, *et seq.*)), which strictly prohibits the use of search and seizure to obtain such materials except under specified circumstances.
( d ) These guidelines are not intended to supersede any other statutory, regulatory, or policy limitations on access to, or the use or disclosure of particular types of documentary materials, including, but not limited to, the provisions of the Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978 (12 U.S.C. 3401, *et seq.*), the Drug Abuse Office and Treatment Act of 1972, as amended (21 U.S.C. 1101, *et seq.*), and the Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Prevention, Treatment, and Rehabilitation Act of 1970, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4541, *et seq.*). For the use of a warrant to obtain information from, or records of, members of the news media, see the Department's statement of policy set forth in § 50.10 of this chapter.
[Order No. 942-81, 46 FR 22364, Apr. 17, 1981, as amended by AG Order No. 3420-2014, 79 FR 10994, Feb. 27, 2014]