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

Calendar No. 534 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5384 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 15, 2020 

Received; read twice and placed on the calendar 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 100 Crosby Street in Mansfield, Louisiana, 

as the ‘‘Dr. C.O. Simpkins, Sr., Post Office’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DR. C.O. SIMPKINS, SR., POST OFFICE. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

5 Postal Service located at 100 Crosby Street in Mansfield, 

6 Louisiana, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Dr. 

7 C.O. Simpkins, Sr., Post Office’’. 

8 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg9 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

10 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 5384 PCS

1 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Dr. C.O. Simpkins, 

2 Sr., Post Office’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 14, 

2020. 

Attest: CHERYL L. JOHNSON, 

Clerk. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 534 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5384 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostPost Office’’. field, Louisiana, as the ‘‘Dr. C.O. Simpkins, Sr., al Service located at 100 Crosby Street in MansSEPTEMBER 15, 2020 

Received; read twice and placed on the calendar 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    Exhibit 23.2

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement
No. 33-63005 on Form S-3 of National Bancshares Corporation of our report dated
January 27, 2000 on the consolidated balance sheets of National Bancshares
Corporation as of December 31, 1999 and 1998, and the related consolidated
statements of income, shareholders' equity and cash flows for the years then
ended; which report is incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form
10-K.

                                            /s/ Crowe, Chizek and Company LLP


Columbus, Ohio
March 22, 2000
##### 








---



##### 








---



##### 



1.
    
    Employment by a firm that competes with the Bank2.
    
    Preparation of any material that will be presented to the Bank by an entity seeking a
loan3.
    
    Rendering investment advice4.
    
    Rendering accounting and tax services5.
    
    Selling real estate6.
    
    Selling insurance7.
    
    Use of Bank equipment, supplies, or facilities8.
    
    Performing any services that the Bank may customarily have performed
    1.
    
    Avoid involvement of any kind in the credit approval process when the credit being
considered will directly or indirectly benefit the director. (This policy includes loans,
overdrafts, immediate credit of funds, and any other form of credit.)2.
    
    Disclose to the President and to the Board any actual or potential conflicts of
interest as soon as the situation arises. (This includes disclosure of any material
interest in the business of a borrower, an applicant, or any other Bank customer. It also
includes any gift or monetary offers made for the purpose of influencing a bank decision.)3.
    
    Use only arms length transactions when buying, selling, or leasing assets or services
to the Bank. (It is Bank policy to contract for assets and services using only arms
length transactions that are in the best interest of the Bank. Directors are asked to
honor this policy and to refrain from asking for special considerations as the Bank
contracts for assets or services.)
     1.
    
    Act with honesty and integrity, avoiding actual or apparent conflicts of interest in
personal and professional relationships.2.
    
    Provide information that is accurate, complete, objective, relevant, timely and
understandable to ensure full, fair, accurate, timely and understandable disclosure in
reports and documents that the Company files with, or submits to government agencies and in
other public communications.3.
    
    Comply with rules and regulations of federal, state and local governments, and other
appropriate private and public regulatory agencies.4.
    
    Act in good faith, responsibly, with due care, competence and diligence, without
misrepresenting material facts or allowing ones independent judgment to be subordinated.




---



##### 



5.
    
    Respect the confidentiality of information acquired in the course of ones work except
when authorized or otherwise legally obligated to disclose. Confidential information
acquired in the course of ones work will not be used for personal advantage. Share
knowledge and maintain skills important and relevant to customer and co-workers needs.6.
    
    Proactively promote ethical behavior as a responsible partner among peers, in the work
environment and in the community.7.
    
    Maintain due care of and control over all assets and resources employed or entrusted.
###### Editorial Note on Part 28

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 28 appear by T.D. ATF-477, 67 FR 18087 through 18090, Apr. 15, 2002.

#### § 28.318 Action on claim.

Action on claims filed under § 28.317 shall be, insofar as applicable, in accordance with the procedure prescribed in § 28.304.

(72 Stat. 1381; 26 U.S.C. 5370)

[25 FR 5734, June 23, 1960. Redesignated at 40 FR 16835, Apr. 15, 1975, and amended by T.D. TTB-8, 69 FR 3834, Jan. 27, 2004]
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-30192 Summary Calendar

LEWIS BURTON ROBERTS, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ET AL, Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 97-CV-203

- - - - - - - - - - November 20, 1998 Before DAVIS, DUHE’, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Lewis Burton Roberts, prisoner # 92317, appeals the summary judgment dismissing of his civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Lewis has failed to demonstrate deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs with regard to his claims that available medication was substituted for unavailable medication, half band-aids were used in place of full band-aids, the defendants failed to give his crutches, he received only two antibiotics in two days, he was unable to obtain relief throughNo. 98-30192 -2- the prison’s administrative remedy procedures, and a special brace was lost and never replaced. See Johnson v. Treen , 759 F.2d 1236, 1237 (5th Cir. 1985). At most, Roberts has shown negligence on the part of defendants. As such, his claims are not actionable under § 1983. See Farmer v. Brennan , 511 U.S. 825, 838 (1994). This appeal is without arguable merit and thus frivolous. It is DISMISSED. See Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5th Cir. R. 42.2. Additionally, Roberts is warned that future frivolous appeals will invite the imposition of sanctions. Roberts should review any pending appeals to ensure that they do not raise frivolous arguments. APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3688 

To provide for the authority for the successors and assigns of the StarrCamargo Bridge Company to maintain and operate a toll bridge across 

the Rio Grande near Rio Grande City, Texas, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 6, 2015 

Mr. CUELLAR introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Foreign Affairs 

A BILL 

To provide for the authority for the successors and assigns 

of the Starr-Camargo Bridge Company to maintain and 

operate a toll bridge across the Rio Grande near Rio 

Grande City, Texas, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. STARR-CAMARGO BRIDGE. 

4 Public Law 87–532 (76 Stat. 153) is amended— 

5 (1) in the first section, in subsection (a)(2)— 

6 (A) by inserting ‘‘, and its successors and 

7 assigns,’’ after ‘‘State of Texas’’; 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3688 IH

1 (B) by inserting ‘‘consisting of not more 

2 than 14 lanes’’ after ‘‘approaches thereto’’; and 

3 (C) by striking ‘‘and for a period of sixty4 six years from the date of completion of such 

5 bridge,’’; 

6 (2) in section 2, by inserting ‘‘and its succes7 sors and assigns,’’ after ‘‘companies’’; 

8 (3) by redesignating sections 3, 4, and 5 as sec9 tions 4, 5, and 6, respectively; 

10 (4) by inserting after section 2 the following: 

11 ‘‘SEC. 3. RIGHTS OF STARR-CAMARGO BRIDGE COMPANY 

12 AND SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS. 

13 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Starr-Camargo Bridge 

14 Company and its successors and assigns shall have the 

15 rights and privileges granted to the B and P Bridge Com16 pany and its successors and assigns under section 2 of 

17 the Act of May 1, 1928 (45 Stat. 471, chapter 466). 

18 ‘‘(b) REQUIREMENT.—In exercising the rights and 

19 privileges granted under subsection (a), the Starr20 Camargo Bridge Company and its successors and assigns 

21 shall act in accordance with— 

22 ‘‘(1) just compensation requirements; 

23 ‘‘(2) public proceeding requirements; and 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3688 IH

1 ‘‘(3) any other requirements applicable to the 

2 exercise of the rights referred to in subsection (a) 

3 under the laws of the State of Texas.’’; and 

4 (5) in section 4 (as redesignated by paragraph 

5 (3))— 

6 (A) by inserting ‘‘and its successors and 

7 assigns,’’ after ‘‘such company’’; 

8 (B) by striking ‘‘or’’ after ‘‘public agen9 cy,’’; 

10 (C) by inserting ‘‘or to a corporation,’’ 

11 after ‘‘international bridge authority or commis12 sion,’’; and 

13 (D) by striking ‘‘authority, or commission’’ 

14 each place it appears and inserting ‘‘authority, 

15 commission, or corporation’’. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
476 P.2d 504

#### Gene BAKER, Petitioner, v. The Honorable James M. SCARBOROUGH, District Judge, First Judicial District, Santa Fe County, New Mexico, Respondent.

No. 9161.

Supreme Court of New Mexico.

Nov. 12, 1970.

Original Prohibition Proceeding

Ordered that petition for writ of prohibition be and the same is hereby denied.
###### Editorial Note on Part 40

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 40 appear by T.D. ATF-460, 66 FR 39094-39096, July 27, 2001; T.D. ATF-464, 66 FR 43479, Aug. 20, 2001; and T.D. TTB-91, 76 FR 5479, Feb. 1, 2011.

#### § 40.2 Territorial extent.

The provisions of the regulations in this part shall apply in the several States of the United States and the District of Columbia.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY ELEV

 122.91

 122.72

 123.16

 123.35

 123.39

 123.60

 123.47

 123.16

 123.70

 122.91

 123.32

 123.20

 122.74

 122.99

 122.74

 122.19

 123.88

 123.97

 123.52

 123.35

 122.92

 123.40

 124.00

 124.31

 124.08

 123.83

 123.55

 124.01

 124.30

 124.45

 123.20

 7,751

 7,665

 7,866

 7,956

 7,974

 8,073

 8,012

 7,866

 8,120

 7,751

 7,941

 7,885

 7,674

 7,787

 7,674

 7,427

 8,205

 8,247

 8,035

 7,956

 7,755

 7,979

 8,261

 8,416

 8,301

 8,181

 8,050

 8,266

 8,411

 8,486

 7,885

STORAGE

-336

-86

+201

+90

+18

+99

-61

-146

+254

-369

+190

-56

-211

+113

-113

-247

+778

+42

-212

-79

-201

+224

+282

+155

-115

-120

-131

+216

+145

+75

-601

CHANGE

4,331

4,455

3,861

3,556

3,525

3,558

3,029

2,947

3,148

2,837

3,442

3,779

3,995

4,079

3,989

3,905

4,372

3,979

3,841

3,960

3,886

4,105

4,122

3,613

3,400

2,944

2,986

3,160

3,233

3,095

2,784

INFLOW

 4,400

 4,397

 3,656

 3,408

 3,412

 3,404

 2,957

 2,919

 2,918

 2,919

 3,243

 3,704

 3,998

 3,918

 3,942

 3,922

 3,877

 3,856

 3,846

 3,897

 3,884

 3,889

 3,875

 3,428

 3,348

 1,619

 2,941

 2,939

 3,043

 2,939

 2,968

POWER

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 4

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 1,275

 0

 0

 2

 0

 1

SPILL

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

 60

HATCHERY

 3

 4

 4

 3

 4

 4

 3

 2

 2

 4

 3

 3

 4

 4

 4

 4

 3

 2

 2

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 3

 4

 4

 4

 3

 3

C.F.S.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

JULY 2007 LAKE NATOMA DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: September 26, 2007

IN LAKE

EVAP

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS -202 111,916 107,466 1,282 1,860 101

ACRE-FEET -202 221,985 213,159 2,543 3,689 200

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES AND EVAPORATION.

SUMMARY

RELEASES (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 213,159

SPILL 2,543

FOLSOM SOUTH CANAL

HATCHERY

 2,596

 3,689

 8,087

FOLSOM

SOUTH 

 37

 37

 40

 40

 40

 40

 40

 40

 40

 40

 40

 40

 39

 40

 40

 40

 40

 40

 40

 40

 40

 40

 42

 44

 47

 47

 47

 48

 51

 55

 55

 1,309

 2,596

(1)

(1) INCHES OF EVAPORATION TAKEN FROM FOLSOM PAN.

RELEASES (ACRE-FEET) 

TOTAL 221,987

Table 12
Exhibit 8.1

                          SIGNIFICANT SUBSIDIARIES

         The following is a list of all of Koor Industries Ltd.'s
significant subsidiaries, including the name, country of incorporation or
residence, proportion of ownership interest and, if different, proportion
of voting power held.


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                     Country           Percentage of     Percentage of voting
                                                  Incorporation or       ownership     power (if different from
Name of Subsidiary                                    residence          interest             ownership)
----------------------------------------------- -------------------- ---------------- -------------------------
<S>                                                    <C>                 <C>                     <C>
Koor Corporate Venture Capital                         Israel              100%                    *
Elisra Electronic Systems Ltd.                         Israel              100%                    *
Makhteshim-Agan Industries Ltd.                        Israel              52.6%                   *
ECI Telecom Ltd.                                       Israel              30.3%                   *
Telrad Networks Ltd.                                   Israel              100%                    *
Sheraton Moriah (Israel) Hotels Ltd.                   Israel              55.0%                   *
Knafaim Arkia Holdings Ltd.                            Israel              28.3%                   *
Koor Trade Ltd.                                        Israel              100%                    *
</TABLE>
(No. 74-CC-421

#### Edgar F. Eldridge, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Department of Transportation, Respondent.

*Opinion filed April 17, 1974.*

Edgar F. Eldridge, Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; Howard W. Feldman, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.
#### Metropolitan Telephone and Telegraph Company v. Metropolitan Telephone and Telegraph Company.

Motion denied, with ten dollars costs. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Clarke and Scott, JJ.
### §130. Purchases through the General Services Administration

On and after September 8, 1978, Howard University is authorized to make purchases through the General Services Administration.

(Pub. L. 95–355, title I, §100, Sept. 8, 1978, 92 Stat. 531.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section is from the Second Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1978, and contained additional provisions relating to purchases by the American Printing House for the Blind, Gallaudet University, and the National Technical Institute for the Deaf, which are set out in sections 106 and 4362 of this title.
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

IN RE VEGAS AMUSEMENT, INC. 

____________________ 

2012-1279 

(Reexamination No. 90/011,023) 

______________________

 

 Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office, Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences. 

______________________ 

JUDGMENT 

______________________ 

MICHAEL E. DERGOSITS, Dergosits & Noah, LLP, of 

San Francisco, California, argued for the appellant. With 

him on the brief was IGOR SHOIKET. 

FARHEENA Y. RASHEED, Associate Solicitor, Office of 

the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, 

of Alexandria, Virginia, argued for appellee. With him on 

the brief were RAYMOND T. CHEN, Solicitor, and LYNNE E.

PETTIGREW, Associate Solicitor. 

______________________ 
THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

 PER CURIAM (DYK, CLEVENGER, and PROST, Circuit 

Judges). 

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36. 

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

December 11, 2012 /s/ Jan Horbaly

 Date Jan Horbaly 

 Clerk
Editorial Note on Part 22
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 22 appear by T.D. ATF-435, 66 FR 5476, Jan. 19, 2001 and T.D. ATF-463 and T.D. ATF-462, 66 FR 42733, 42736, Aug. 15, 2001.

§ 22.172 Application and permit, Form 5150.33. ( a ) All permits previously issued to the United States or any of its Government agencies on Form 1444 shall remain valid and shall be regulated by the same provisions of this subpart as it refers to permits on Forms 5150.33.
( b ) A Government agency shall apply for a permit to obtain tax-free spirits on Form 5150.33. Upon approval, Form 5150.33 will be returned to the Government agency, and shall serve as authority to procure spirits free of tax.
( c ) A Government agency may specify on its application for a permit to procure tax-free spirits, Form 5150.33, that it desires a single permit authorizing all sub-agencies under its control to procure tax-free spirits; or each Government location (agency, department, bureau, and etc.) desiring to procure tax-free spirits for nonbeverage purposes may individually submit an application for a permit on Form 5150.33.
( d ) An application for a permit shall be signed by the head of the agency or sub-agency, or the incumbent of an office which is authorized by the head of the agency or sub-agency, to sign. Evidence of authorization to sign for the head of the agency or sub-agency shall be furnished with the application.
( e ) Tax-free spirits obtained by Government agencies may not be used for non-Government purposes.
[T.D. ATF-199, 50 FR 9183, Mar. 6, 1985; 50 FR 20099, May 14, 1985]
(No. 6212

#### Joseph J. Muenster, M.D., Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, Respondent.

*Opinion filed January 9, 1973.*

Joseph J. Muenster, M.D., Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; Saul R. Wexler, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.
Regulatory Announcement

Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives

Modifications to Renewable Fuel Standard 

Program Requirements

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct final action to amend the current Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) 

program requirements, which took effect on September 1, 2007. This 

action addresses technical errors and areas requiring minor clarifications 

or modifications in the existing RFS program regulations.

Background 

Following publication of the final RFS regulations in May 2007, EPA discovered a 

number of technical errors and areas within the regulations that could benefit from 

clarification or modification. This direct final rule amends the regulations to make the 

appropriate corrections, clarifications and modifications.

Many of the amendments contained in this direct final rule address grammatical or 

typographical errors, or provide minor clarifications. A few amendments are being made 

in order to assist regulated entities in complying with the RFS program requirements 

and lessen regulatory requirements where possible without compromising the goals 

of the RFS program. These amendments codify interpretations of the RFS regulations 

laid out in the Question & Answer document developed for parties regulated under 

the RFS (www.epa.gov/otaq/renewablefuels/420f08006.pdf ).

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

EPA420-F-08-019

September 2008
Regulatory Announcement

2

This rule does not address changes to the RFS program called for under the Energy Independence 

and Security Act of 2007. EPA is currently undertaking a complete rulemaking process that will 

include a proposal and public comment period on new regulations prior to finalizing them. This 

action addresses only technical errors and areas requiring minor clarifications or modifications in 

the existing RFS program regulations.

For More Information

For more information, please contact Ms. Megan Brachtl at:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

Mail Code 6406J

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington, DC 20460

telephone: (202) 343-9473

fax: (202) 343-2802

email: brachtl.megan@epa.gov
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED NOVEMBER 18, 2022

NO. 03-22-00433-CV

Katharine Ehresman, Appellant

v.

LF Technology Development Corporation Limited; TECX Academy Austin, Inc.; 

Starstone Specialty Insurance Company; and, Individually, Alexander Greystoke; Patricio 

Lebrija; John McLaughlin; Lyanne Millhouse; Eli Rabinowitz; Simon Holden; Michael 

Culhane; Oscar Ramos; Susan Strasberg; Chris Nichols; Michael Casey; and John Doe(s) 

1-20, Appellees

APPEAL FROM THE 345TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE, JUSTICES TRIANA AND SMITH

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION –

OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the trial court on June 15, 2022. Having reviewed 

the record, it appears that the Court lacks jurisdiction over the appeal. Therefore, the Court 

dismisses the appeal for want of jurisdiction. The appellant shall pay all costs relating to this 

appeal, both in this Court and in the court below.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.
      SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, J. Bruce Robinson, certify, pursuant
    to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
    Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Zygo Corporation on Form 10-Q for
    the fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities
    and Exchange Commission (the Report), fully complies with the
    requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
    1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
    material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Zygo
    Corporation.

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

Dated: February 9, 2009/s/
          J. Bruce RobinsonJ. Bruce RobinsonChairman andChief Executive Officer
          ofZygo Corporation




---