alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §580p–3. Use of royalty fees; special account

(a) The Secretary may establish and collect use or royalty fees for the manufacture, reproduction, or use of the name or character "Woodsy Owl" and the associated slogan, "Give a Hoot, Don't Pollute", as a symbol for a public service campaign to promote wise use of the environment and programs which foster maintenance and improvement of environmental quality.

(b) The Secretary shall deposit into a special account all fees collected pursuant to this Act. Such fees are hereby made available for obligation and expenditure for the purpose of furthering the "Woodsy Owl" campaign.

(Pub. L. 93–318, §3, June 22, 1974, 88 Stat. 245.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This Act, referred to in subsec. (b), is Pub. L. 93–318, June 22, 1974, 88 Stat. 244, which enacted sections 580p, 580p–1, 580p–3, and 580p–4 of this title and section 711a of Title 18, Crimes and Criminal Procedure, and amended section 580p–2 of this title and section 711 of Title 18. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Tables.

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 488b–5 of Title 31 prior to the general revision and enactment of Title 31, Money and Finance, by Pub. L. 97–258, §1, Sept. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 877.
Case 17-10307-BFK Doc 74-1 Filed 05/12/21 Entered 05/12/21 14:11:45 Desc

Loan Modification Page 1 of 9
Case 17-10307-BFK Doc 74-1 Filed 05/12/21 Entered 05/12/21 14:11:45 Desc

Loan Modification Page 2 of 9
Case 17-10307-BFK Doc 74-1 Filed 05/12/21 Entered 05/12/21 14:11:45 Desc

Loan Modification Page 3 of 9
Case 17-10307-BFK Doc 74-1 Filed 05/12/21 Entered 05/12/21 14:11:45 Desc

Loan Modification Page 4 of 9
Case 17-10307-BFK Doc 74-1 Filed 05/12/21 Entered 05/12/21 14:11:45 Desc

Loan Modification Page 5 of 9
Case 17-10307-BFK Doc 74-1 Filed 05/12/21 Entered 05/12/21 14:11:45 Desc

Loan Modification Page 6 of 9
Case 17-10307-BFK Doc 74-1 Filed 05/12/21 Entered 05/12/21 14:11:45 Desc

Loan Modification Page 7 of 9
Case 17-10307-BFK Doc 74-1 Filed 05/12/21 Entered 05/12/21 14:11:45 Desc

Loan Modification Page 8 of 9
Case 17-10307-BFK Doc 74-1 Filed 05/12/21 Entered 05/12/21 14:11:45 Desc

Loan Modification Page 9 of 9
#### United States Trust Company of New York, Respondent, v. Heloise F. Van Damm, Appellant, Impleaded with Others.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Clarke, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ.
Editorial Note on Part 1292
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1292 appear at 68 FR 9846, Feb. 28, 2003, and 68 FR 10360, Mar. 5, 2003.

§ 1292.18 Administrative review of denied requests for reconsideration. ( a ) *Authority of the Director.* The Director has the discretionary authority to review a request for reconsideration pursuant to § 1292.13(e), § 1292.16(f), or § 1292.17(d) that has been denied. ( 1 ) An organization whose request for reconsideration pursuant to § 1292.13(e), § 1292.16(f), or § 1292.17(d) has been denied may request administrative review from the Director within ten (10) days of the denial, identifying the alleged factual or legal errors in the underlying determination. The request for administrative review shall be submitted to the Assistant Director for Policy (or the Assistant Director for Policy's delegate), who will forward the request to the Director.
( 2 ) The Director may review a request for reconsideration pursuant to § 1292.13(e), § 1292.16(f), or § 1292.17(d) that has been denied on the Director's own initiative by issuing a notification of administrative review within ten (10) days of the denial. This notification shall state the issues to be reviewed.
( 3 ) The recognition of the organization and the accreditation of any representatives that are subject to administrative review as described in this section shall remain valid pending the Director's consideration of the request, except in the case of an interim suspension pursuant to 8 CFR 1003.111.
( b ) *Review.* The Director shall review the record before the Office of Policy and the organization's request for administrative review, and, in the Director's discretion, may request additional filings from the organization. The Director may affirm the denial of the request for reconsideration or vacate the denial and return the matter to the Assistant Director for Policy (or the Assistant Director for Policy's delegate) for further action consistent with the Director's determination. The Director may not approve a request for recognition or accreditation or renewal thereof.
( c ) *Referral of cases to the Attorney General.* The Director will refer to the Attorney General for review of decisions pursuant to this section in all cases that the Attorney General directs the Director to refer to him or that the Director believes should be referred to him.
( d ) *Decisions as precedents.* The Director, in his discretion, may cause reconsideration decisions by the OLAP Director pursuant to § 1292.13(e), § 1292.16(f), or § 1292.17(d), or decisions by the Director pursuant to this section to be published as precedents in the same manner as decisions of the Board and the Attorney General. Such decisions by the OLAP Director, except as overruled by the Director, and such decisions by the Director, except as overruled by the Attorney General, will serve as precedents in all proceedings under part 1292 involving the same issue or issues.
[81 FR 92367, Dec. 19, 2016, as amended at 84 FR 44542, Aug. 26, 2019; 84 FR 31470, July 2, 2019; 85 FR 69482, Nov. 3, 2020]
# Official Journal L 159/22 J

| | ISSN 1725-2555 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 159 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 4822 June 2005 |

ISSN 1725-2555

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 159

English edition

Legislation

Volume 4822 June 2005

---

| Contents | | I   Acts whose publication is obligatory | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | * | Council Regulation (EC) No 941/2005 of 30 May 2005 amending Regulation (EC) No 1868/94 establishing a quota system in relation to the production of potato starch | 1 |
| | | Commission Regulation (EC) No 942/2005 of 21 June 2005 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables | 4 |
| | * | Commission Regulation (EC) No 943/2005 of 21 June 2005 concerning the permanent authorisation of additives in feedingstuffs (1) | 6 |
| | * | Commission Regulation (EC) No 944/2005 of 21 June 2005 suspending the application of certain provisions of Regulation (EC) No 331/2005 | 12 |

Contents

I   Acts whose publication is obligatory

page

*

Council Regulation (EC) No 941/2005 of 30 May 2005 amending Regulation (EC) No 1868/94 establishing a quota system in relation to the production of potato starch

1

Commission Regulation (EC) No 942/2005 of 21 June 2005 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

4

*

Commission Regulation (EC) No 943/2005 of 21 June 2005 concerning the permanent authorisation of additives in feedingstuffs (1)

6

*

Commission Regulation (EC) No 944/2005 of 21 June 2005 suspending the application of certain provisions of Regulation (EC) No 331/2005

12

| | | II   Acts whose publication is not obligatory |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | Commission |
| | * | Commission Decision of 6 October 2004 declaring a concentration compatible with the common market and the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/M.3431 — Sonoco/Ahlstrom)
  (notified under document number C(2004) 3678) | 13 |

II   Acts whose publication is not obligatory

Commission

*

Commission Decision of 6 October 2004 declaring a concentration compatible with the common market and the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/M.3431 — Sonoco/Ahlstrom)
  (notified under document number C(2004) 3678)

(notified under document number C(2004) 3678)

13

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
- Newsroom        - Press Releases
      - Public Statements
      - Speeches
      - Testimony
      - Spotlight Topics
      - Media Gallery
      - Upcoming Events
      - Webcasts
      - What's New
      - SEC Videos
      - Reports and Publications
      - RSS Feeds
      - Social Media 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meetings

**TIME AND DATE:** Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the Government in the Sunshine Act, Pub. L. 94-409, the Securities and Exchange Commission will hold an Open Meeting on Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 10:00 a.m.

**PLACE:**The meeting will be held in Auditorium LL-002 at the Commission’s headquarters, 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549.

**STATUS:** This meeting will begin at 10:00 a.m. (ET) and will be open to the public. Seating will be on a first-come, first-served basis. Visitors will be subject to security checks. The meeting will be webcast on the Commission’s website at www.sec.gov.

**MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:**

- The Commission will consider whether to propose amendments to Rule 15c2-11 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 that governs the publication of quotations for securities in a quotation medium other than a national securities exchange, and issue proposed guidance on the Rule and a concept release requesting public comment on information repositories.
- The Commission will consider whether to adopt a new rule and related amendments under the Securities Act of 1933 that permits issuers to engage in oral or written communications with certain institutional investors, either prior to or following the filing of a registration statement, to determine whether such investors might have an interest in a contemplated registered securities offering.
- The Commission will consider whether to adopt a new rule under the Investment Company Act of 1940 that will permit exchange-traded funds that satisfy certain conditions to operate without first obtaining an exemptive order, as well as related form amendments and the rescission of certain exemptive relief to ETFs and their sponsors.  The Commission will also consider whether to issue a related order granting exemptive relief from certain provisions of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the rules thereunder.

At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in the scheduling of meeting items.

**CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:**For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed, please contact Vanessa A. Countryman, Office of the Secretary, at (202) 551-5400.

Dated: September 18, 2019

Vanessa A. CountrymanSecretary
### §782. Sponges of less than prescribed size; possession prima facie evidence

The presence of sponges of a diameter of less than five inches on any vessel or boat of the United States engaged in sponging in the waters of the Gulf of Mexico or the Straits of Florida outside of State territorial limits, or the possession of any sponges of less than the said diameter sold or delivered by such vessels, shall be prima facie evidence of a violation of the provisions of this chapter.

(Aug. 15, 1914, ch. 253, §2, 38 Stat. 692.)
(No. 77-CC-0124

#### National Council Of Engineering Examiners, Claimant, *v.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Order filed January 31, 1979.*

This cause is before the Court on the motion of Respondent to withdraw a stipulation heretofore filed, in which Respondent agreed to entry of an award in the amount of $1,235.00.

On consideration thereof, it is hereby ordered that Respondent’s motion for leave to withdraw its stipulation be, and hereby is, denied.

It is further ordered that Claimant be, and hereby is, awarded the sum of $1,235.00.
#### § 328.3 [Reserved]
*This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of

law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the

citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under

the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

F I L E D

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

NOV 25 1997

PATRICK FISHER

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

USMAN SHEHU SULE, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, No. 97-1209

v. (D.C. No. 95-S-2042)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, (D. Colo.)

Defendant-Appellee.

 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before BALDOCK, McKAY, and LUCERO, Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this panel has determined

unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this

appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered

submitted without oral argument.

Plaintiff, an inmate incarcerated at the United States Penitentiary-Administrative

Maximum (ADX) in Florence, Colorado, filed a complaint pursuant to the Federal Tort

Claims Act (FTCA), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b) and 2671-2680, for the negligence of the
2

United States in maintaining an overcrowded prison at the Federal Correctional

Institution in Sheridan, Oregon.

We affirm the determination of the magistrate judge as accepted by the district

court in its Order of Dismissal filed May 20, 1997, that the claim here is properly barred

by res judicata. Because the district court correctly determined that Plaintiff’s claim is

barred by res judicata, we need not address the discretionary function issue.

AFFIRMED.

Entered for the Court

Monroe G. McKay

Circuit Judge
#### § 950.3 Definitions.

As used in this part:

*1604 toll program* refers to any of the tolling programs authorized under section 1604 of SAFETEA-LU. These programs include the Value Pricing Pilot Program, the Express Lanes Demonstration Program, and the Interstate System Construction Toll Pilot Program.

*Electronic toll collection* means the ability for vehicle operators to pay tolls automatically without slowing down from normal highway speeds.

*Toll agency* means the relevant public or private entity or entities to which toll authority has been granted for a facility under a 1604 toll program.
EXHIBIT 10.54 

AMENDMENT NO. 1 TOHIBERNIA CORPORATION 

DEFERRED AWARD PLAN 

        THIS AMENDMENT NO. 1 (the  "Amendment")  to the Hibernia  Corporation  Deferred Award Plan (the "Plan") is made as of the 22ndday of October 2002.

RECITALS 

        WHEREAS,Hibernia Corporation, a Corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State ofLouisiana (the “Company”) maintains the Plan, which was adopted by the ExecutiveCompensation Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company (the“Committee”); and 

        WHEREAS,under the terms of the Plan, the Committee has the authority to amend the Plan; and 

        WHEREAS, theCommittee adopted the following amendments to the Plan on October 22, 2002; 

        NOW,THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises set forth above, and effective as of the datefirst above written, the Plan shall be and hereby is amended as follows: 

PLAN AMENDMENTS 

        1.                 Paragraph 2.4 of the Plan entitled “Change in Control” is hereby          amended by deleting the existing paragraph 2.4 and substituting the following          paragraph 2.4 in its place:
#### § 337.10 Failure to appear for oath administration ceremony.

An applicant who fails to appear without good cause for more than one oath administration ceremony for which he or she was duly notified shall be presumed to have abandoned his or her intent to be naturalized. Such presumption shall be regarded as the receipt of derogatory information, and the procedures contained in § 335.5 of this chapter shall be followed.

[58 FR 49916, Sept. 24, 1993]
Case 18-10651-BFK Doc 61 Filed 03/23/18 Entered 03/23/18 18:29:53 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 9
Case 18-10651-BFK Doc 61 Filed 03/23/18 Entered 03/23/18 18:29:53 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 9
Case 18-10651-BFK Doc 61 Filed 03/23/18 Entered 03/23/18 18:29:53 Desc Main

 Document Page 3 of 9
Case 18-10651-BFK Doc 61 Filed 03/23/18 Entered 03/23/18 18:29:53 Desc Main

 Document Page 4 of 9
Case 18-10651-BFK Doc 61 Filed 03/23/18 Entered 03/23/18 18:29:53 Desc Main

 Document Page 5 of 9
Case 18-10651-BFK Doc 61 Filed 03/23/18 Entered 03/23/18 18:29:53 Desc Main

 Document Page 6 of 9
Case 18-10651-BFK Doc 61 Filed 03/23/18 Entered 03/23/18 18:29:53 Desc Main

 Document Page 7 of 9
Case 18-10651-BFK Doc 61 Filed 03/23/18 Entered 03/23/18 18:29:53 Desc Main

 Document Page 8 of 9
Case 18-10651-BFK Doc 61 Filed 03/23/18 Entered 03/23/18 18:29:53 Desc Main

 Document Page 9 of 9
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Before the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

July 20, 2021

In the Matter of

XR Energy Inc.; and

Geospatial Corporation

File No. 500-1

ORDER OF SUSPENSION OF

TRADING

It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that the public interest and the 

protection of investors require a suspension in the trading of the securities of each of the issuers 

listed below because of questions regarding the adequacy and accuracy of information 

concerning the securities of each of these issuers. These include questions and concerns about

the status of their corporate organization and operations, if any, and recent, increased activity and 

volatility in trading in the securities of each of these issuers, including in the May and June 2021 

time frame, in the absence of any publicly available news or recent information by these issuers. 

As of July 14, 2021, the stock of each of the issuers below was quoted and traded on OTC Link 

whose parent company is OTC Markets Group, Inc., had multiple market makers, and was 

eligible for the “piggyback” exception of Exchange Act Rule 15c2-11(f)(3). None of the issuers 

below has posted any information with OTC Markets Group, Inc. or filed any information with 

the Securities and Exchange Commission for at least one year.

XR Energy Inc. (OTC: XREG) (CIK 0001535194)

Geospatial Corporation (OTC: GSPH) (CIK 0001011395)
2

The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the protection of investors 

require a suspension of trading in the securities of the above-listed companies.

THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange 

Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of the above-listed companies is suspended for the 

period from 9:30 a.m. EDT on July 21, 2021, through 11:59 p.m. EDT on August 3, 2021.

By the Commission.

Vanessa A. Countryman

Secretary
###### 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.

#### § 1240.14 Finality of order.

The order of the immigration judge shall become final in accordance with § 1003.39 of this chapter.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Cory L. CLARK, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 01-4830.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted May 16, 2002.

Decided May 24, 2002.

Douglas A. Ramseur, Bowen, Bryant, Champlin & Carr, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Paul J. McNulty, United States Attorney, Peter S. Duffey, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Following a jury trial and the imposition of sentence, Cory L. Clark appeals from *961the district court’s order denying his motion to dismiss and to suppress evidence of incriminating statements he made to fellow inmates Bernard Noel and Derrick Harris. He contends that Noel and Harris obtained the statements while acting as government agents in violation of his Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Finding no error, we affirm.

The Sixth Amendment right to counsel is violated when the Government “deliberately elicit[s]” incriminating statements from a criminal defendant after he has been indicted and outside the presence of counsel. *Massiah v. United States,*377 U.S. 201, 206, 84 S.Ct. 1199, 12 L.Ed.2d 246 (1964); *see United States v. Love,*134 F.3d 595, 604 (4th Cir.1998). However, this right is “not violated whenever — by luck or happenstance — the [Government] obtains incriminating statements from the accused after the right to counsel has attached.” *Maine v. Moulton,*474 U.S. 159, 176, 106 S.Ct. 477, 88 L.Ed.2d 481 (1985); *see also Kuhlmann v. Wilson,*477 U.S. 436, 459, 106 S.Ct. 2616, 91 L.Ed.2d 364 (1986) (holding that “defendant must demonstrate that the police and their informant took some action, beyond merely listening, that was designed deliberately to elicit incriminating remarks”).

Here, the district court found no evidence that the Government instructed Noel to be alert for and to report incriminating statements by other inmates and found that no incentive was offered by the Government for such reporting. The court also noted that here, as in *Love,*the informant initiated the contact with the Government. Although Noel, like the informant in *Love,*may have had an expectation of future favors from the Government in return for his assistance, none was promised. Because these “crucial indicia of government cooperation” were lacking, we find that there was no Sixth Amendment violation. *Love,*134 F.3d at 604.

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order denying Clark’s motion to dismiss and suppress. 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.*
# Official Journal C 60/4 Fe

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 60 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 654 February 2022 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 60

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 654 February 2022

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 60/01 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  1
  ) | 1 |
| 2022/C 60/02 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – Cases where the Commission raises no objections | 51 |

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2022/C 60/01

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  1
  )

1

1

2022/C 60/02

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – Cases where the Commission raises no objections

51

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 60/03 | State aid – Poland – State aid SA.37489 (2013/FC) – Alleged unlawful State aid to Sferia S.A. – Poland – Invitation to submit comments pursuant to Article 108(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (
  1
  ) | 60 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2022/C 60/03

State aid – Poland – State aid SA.37489 (2013/FC) – Alleged unlawful State aid to Sferia S.A. – Poland – Invitation to submit comments pursuant to Article 108(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (
  1
  )

1

60

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN