alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(No. 4320

#### Sandusky Corder, Claimant, vs. State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed March*9, *1951.*

Wilbur D. Capps, Attorney for Claimant.

Ivan A. Elliott, Attorney General; C. Arthur Nebel, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Delaney, J.

Claimant, Sandusky Corder, filed his complaint and amended complaint setting forth that pursuant to an Act of the General Assembly of the State of Illinois entitled “An Act to provide for the registration of burial places of soldiers and sailors serving in all United States wars, or during the.years 1940 or 1941, and for locating such burial places and reporting them to the Federal *247government, and transporting to such burial places and setting up headstones provided by the Federal government”, approved July 8, 1935, and the several amendments thereto; and pursuant also to instructions from the Military and Naval Department, War Veterans’ Graves Registration of the State of Illinois, claimant did, in Hancock County, Illinois, at the time set forth in the bill of particulars filed herein, and at the time hereinafter mentioned, transport and erect headstones furnished by the Federal government at the graves of certain named deceased veterans of United States wars.

The record consists of the complaint, amended complaint, bill of particulars, report of the Adjutant General, dated January 8, 1951, signed by Leo M. Boyle, Major General, the Adjutant General, which has been filed in this case under Rule 16 of the Court, and which constitutes the record in this cause.

Claimant erected seven headstones; and, as a result of the transportation and erection thereof, there is now due claimant the sum of $70.00.

The seven markers were placed at the respective veterans’ graves prior to, July 1, 1949, and were payable from funds allocated for the 65th biennium, but payment was not cleared before the lapse in appropriation.

This Court has repeatedly held that in the event certain articles are properly furnished, and the State is directed by statute to pay for same, and a bill therefor has been submitted within a reasonable time, but the same was not approved and vouchered for payment before the lapse of the appropriation from which it is payable, an award for the reasonable value of the items furnished will be made, where, at the time the expenses were incurred there were sufficient funds remaining un*248expended in the appropriation to pay for the same. *(Carl S. Johnson*v. *State,*16 C.C.R. 96; *Rock Island Sand and Gravel Co.*v. *State,*8 C.C.R. 165; *Oak Park Hospital*v. *State,*11 C.C.R. 219; *Yourtee-Roberts Sand Co.*v. *State,*14 C.C.R. 124.)

An award is, therefore, entered in favor of claimant, Sandusky Corder, for the sum of $70.00.
###### Editorial Note on Part 655

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 655 appear at 71 FR 35521, 35522, June 21, 2006.

#### § 655.675 Non-applicability of the Equal Access to Justice Act.

A proceeding under subpart G of this part is not subject to the Equal Access to Justice Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C. 504. In such a proceeding, the administrative law judge shall have no authority to award attorney fees and/or other litigation expenses pursuant to the provisions of the Equal Access to Justice Act.
### §4352. Responsibility for preparation of FRUS series

#### (a) In general

(1)(A) The Historian of the Department of State shall be responsible for the preparation of the FRUS series, including the selection of records, in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.

(B) The Advisory Committee on Historical Diplomatic Documentation shall review records, and shall advise and make recommendations to the Historian concerning all aspects of preparation and publication of the FRUS series, including, in accordance with the procedures contained in section 4353 of this title, the review and selection of records for inclusion in volumes of the series.

(2) Other departments, agencies, and other entities of the United States Government shall cooperate with the Office of the Historian by providing full and complete access to the records pertinent to United States foreign policy decisions and actions and by providing copies of selected records in accordance with the procedures developed under section 4353 of this title, except that no access to any record, and no provision of any copy of a record, shall be required in the case of any record that was prepared less than 20 years before the date of a request for such access or copy made by the Office of the Historian.

#### (b) National Archives and Records Administration

Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the requirement for the National Archives and Records Administration to provide access to, and copies of, records to the Department of State for the FRUS series shall be governed by chapter 21 of title 44, by any agreement concluded between the Department of State and the National Archives and Records Administration, and, in the case of Presidential records, by section 2204 of such title.

(Aug. 1, 1956, ch. 841, title IV, §402, as added Pub. L. 102–138, title I, §198(a), Oct. 28, 1991, 105 Stat. 685; amended Pub. L. 117–81, div. E, title LV, §5504(1), Dec. 27, 2021, 135 Stat. 2376.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2021—Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 117–81 substituted "20" for "26".

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

#### Authority of Secretary of State

Except as otherwise provided, Secretary of State to have and exercise any authority vested by law in any official or office of Department of State and references to such officials or offices deemed to refer to Secretary of State or Department of State, as appropriate, see section 2651a of this title and section 161(d) of Pub. L. 103–236, set out as a note under section 2651a of this title.
Exhibit 99

SVYAZINVEST                                                     ROSTELECOM

PRESS-RELEASE

     Moscow   -   November   03,   2003   -   Svyazinvest,    Russia's   largest
telecommunications  holding  company,  and Rostelecom  (NYSE:  ROS; RTS:  RTKM),
Russia's national  long-distance  telecommunications  operator,  today announced
that Rostelecom's Board of Directors has appointed Dmitry Y. Yerokhin as the new
General Director of the Company. Dmitry Y. Yerokhin previously held the position
of First Deputy  General  Director of Rostelecom.  The Board of Directors  today
also accepted the resignation of Sergey I. Kuznetsov as General  Director of the
Company,  effective  immediately,  in connection with his appointment as General
Director of North-West Telecom.

     The  Chairman  of  Rostelecom's  Board  of  Directors,  Valery  N.  Yashin,
commented:  "Our  main  priority  when  selecting  a  new  General  Director  of
Rostelecom  was to ensure the continued  development  of the Company.  Dmitry Y.
Yerokhin has considerable  experience within the  telecommunications  sector and
the Company. He has also played one of the key roles in developing the corporate
transformation  program  that is currently  being  implemented  by  Rostelecom's
management  team.  I'm sure that  under  the  direction  of Dmitry Y.  Yerokhin,
Rostelecom will deliver steady progress."

     Dmitry Y. Yerokhin has held the position of First Deputy  General  Director
of Rostelecom since 2001. He has worked in the  telecommunications  sector since
1973 and has held executive positions at Rostelecom since 1997. Mr. Yerokhin was
born in Makhachkala in 1950 and graduated with honors from Dagestan  Polytechnic
Institute in 1977 with a degree in radio equipment  engineering.  He is married,
with two children.



For further details please contact:

Svyazinvest                            Rostelecom
Informational Department               Public and Investor Relations Department
Tel.: (095) 727-0418                   Tel.: (095) 973 9920
Fax: (095) 727-0475                    Fax: (095) 787 2850
e-mail: pr@svyazinvest.ru              e-mail: oracb@hq.rt.ru
(No. 74-CC-210

#### Paul Karl Riemer, Jr., Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Department of Transportation, Respondent.

*Opinion filed February 14, 1974.*

Paul Karl Riemer, Jr., Claimant, pro se.

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

Per Curiam.
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION

I, Michael Gilligan, certify that:



| | 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of PowerShares DB Commodity Index Tracking Fund; and
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      |  |  |  |                        
|--------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|Dated: March 29, 2013 |  |  |  | /s/ Michael Gilligan   
|                      |  |  |  | Michael Gilligan       
|                      |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 80 (Tuesday, April 26, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 23314]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9993]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Navy


Notice of Intent To Grant Partially Exclusive Patent License; 
Sean Linehan

AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DoD.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The invention listed below is assigned to the United States 
Government as represented by the Secretary of the Navy. The Department 
of the Navy hereby gives notice of its intent to grant to Sean Linehan 
a revocable, nonassignable, partially exclusive license to practice in 
the United States, the Government-owned invention described in U.S. 
Patent 7,222,525 (Navy Case 84945): Issued May 29, 2007, entitled 
``SKIN AND TISSUE SIMULANT FOR MUNITIONS TESTING''.

DATES: Anyone wishing to object to the grant of this license must file 
written objections along with supporting evidence, if any, not later 
than May 11, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Written objections are to be filed with Naval Surface 
Warfare Center, Crane Division, Code OOL, Bldg 2, 300 Highway 361, 
Crane, IN 47522-5001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Christopher Monsey, Naval Surface 
Warfare Center, Crane Division, Code OOL, Bldg 2, 300 Highway 361, 
Crane, IN 47522-5001, telephone 812-854-4100.

    Authority:  35 U.S.C. 207, 37 CFR part 404.

    Dated: April 19, 2011.
D.J. Werner
Lieutenant Commander, Office of the Judge Advocate General, U.S. Navy, 
Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2011-9993 Filed 4-25-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P
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 Annual Report of MagnaChip Semiconductor LLC (the Company) on
Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert J. Krakauer, Executive Vice President, Strategic Operations and Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, 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 Company.



|                                                                                              
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/    ROBERT J.
KRAKAUER                                                                     
|Robert J. Krakauer Executive Vice President, Strategic Operations, and Chief Financial
Officer

March 31, 2006
**Exhibit 32.2**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuantto section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) ofsection 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersignedofficers of O2 Secure Wireless, Inc., a Georgia corporation (the “Company”), dohereby certify, to the best of their knowledge, that:

1.         The Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for theperiod ending September 30, 2006 (the “Report”) of the Company complies in allmaterial respects with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2.         The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.
| */s/ T. Scott Conley*                         | * * |
|-----------------------------------------------|----------|
| T. Scott Conley, Chief Executive Officer      |
|                                          |
| Date: February 13, 2007                       |
|                                          |
|                                          |
| */s/ India Creery*                            | * * |
| India Creery, Interim Chief Financial Officer |
|                                          |
| Date: February 13, 2007                       |

 

----
<page>			   EXHIBIT 31.01

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Jeffrey A. Rothman, President of Demeter Management Corporation
("Demeter"), the general partner of the registrant, certify that:

1.		I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the
registrant;

2.	Based on my knowledge, this report does 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, the financial statements, and other
financial information included in this report, fairly present
in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the
periods presented in this report;

4.	The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible
for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-
15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a)	Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or
caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be
designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others
within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;

b)	Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our
conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure
controls and procedures, as of the end of the period
covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c)	Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred
during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is <page>
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's
internal control over financial reporting; and

5.	The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the
audit committee of Demeter's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):

a)	All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in
the design or operation of internal control over financial
reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect
the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and

b)	Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves
management or other employees who have a significant role
in the registrant's internal control over financial
reporting.







Date:  August 16, 2004    /s/	Jeffrey A. Rothman
		Jeffrey A. Rothman
	President,
	Demeter Management Corporation,
	general partner of the registrant
#### § 669.340 What core services are available to eligible MSFW's?

The core services identified in WIA section 134(d)(2) are available to eligible MSFW's.
488 P.2d 112

#### STATE of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. E. R. DOWNING, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 677.

Court of Appeals of New Mexico.

July 30, 1971.

D. D. Archer, Artesia, for defendant-appellant.

David L. Norvell, Atty. Gen., Jay F. Rosenthal, Asst. Atty. Gen., Santa Fe, for plaintiff-appellee.

*63OPINION

WOOD, Chief Judge.

Defendant was convicted of issuing two worthless checks contrary to § 40-49-4, N.M.S.A.1953 (Repl. Vol. 6). He claims the evidence is insufficient to sustain the convictions.

As to the first check, he claims it was post-dated and the Worthless Check Act does not apply to any post-dated check. Paragraph B of § 40-49-6, N.M.S.A. 1953 (Repl. Vol. 6). We agree.

It was stipulated that the hay, which was sold to defendant, was weighed on the 25th of June. The payee of the first check testified twice that if the hay was weighed on the 25th of June, he accepted the check on that date. In other testimony the payee testified that he didn’t remember when he accepted the check. He also testified, in answer to the court’s question as to whether it was a post-dated check: “Not to my knowledge, it wasn’t.” The payee’s lack of knowledge as to whether it was a postdated check does not contradict his testimony that the check was accepted on the date the hay was weighed, which was June 25th. The check was dated June 30th; thus, it was post-dated and neither evidence nor inference contradicts this. The Worthless Check Act does not apply to post-dated checks. Section 40-49-6 (B), supra. The defendant’s motion to dismiss the charge as to the first check should have been sustained. The conviction, based on the first check, is reversed.

Defendant claims the Worthless Check Act and, therefore, § 40-49-4, supra, is not applicable to the second check. He relies on Paragraph A of § 40-49-6, supra, which makes the Act inapplicable to a check “ * * * where the payee * * has reason to believe that the drawer did not have on deposit or to his credit with the drawee sufficient funds to insure payment on its presentation; * * * ” The issue as to the applicability of this provision was submitted to the jury on conflicting evidence. Reviewing this evidence, and resolving the conflicts in favor of the State as the jury necessarily did by its verdict, State v. Harrison, 81 N.M. 623, 471 P.2d 193 (Ct.App.1970), there is-substantial evidence that the payee did not come within the above provision of § 40-49-6, supra.

The judgment and sentence based on the check dated June 30th is reversed. The judgment and sentence based on the check dated July 20th is affirmed. The cause is remanded with directions to proceed in a manner not inconsistent herewith.

It is so ordered.

HENDLEY and SUTIN, JJ., concur.
###### Editorial Note on Part 416

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 416 appear at 68 FR 53509, Sept. 11, 2003.

#### § 416.2116 Medicaid eligibility determinations.

If a State requests, we may agree, under the conditions in this subpart, to make Medicaid eligibility determinations on behalf of the State. Under these agreements, we make the Medicaid determinations when determinations or redeterminations are necessary for SSI purposes. Our determinations may include non-SSI requirements that are mandated by Federal law. When we determine that a person is eligible for Medicaid in accordance with § 416.2111 or that we are not making the determination, we notify the State of that fact.
§ 404.1217 Continuation of coverage. The coverage of State and local government employees continues as follows: ( a ) *Absolute coverage group.* Generally, the services of an employee covered as a part of an absolute coverage group (see § 404.1205) continue to be covered indefinitely. A position covered as a part of an absolute coverage group continues to be covered even if the position later comes under a retirement system. This includes policemen's and firemen's positions which are covered with an absolute coverage group.
( b ) *Retirement system coverage group.* Generally, the services of employees in positions covered as a part of a retirement system coverage group continue to be covered indefinitely. For a retirement system coverage group made up of members who chose coverage, a position continues to be covered until it is removed from the retirement system and is no longer occupied by a member who chose coverage or by a new member of the system. Coverage is not terminated because the positions are later covered under additional retirement systems or removed from coverage under a retirement system, or because the retirement system is abolished with respect to the positions. However, if the retirement system has been abolished, newly created or reclassified positions or positions in a newly created political subdivision cannot be covered as a part of the retirement system coverage group. If the retirement system is not abolished, a newly created or reclassified position is a part of the coverage group if the position would have been a part of the group had it existed earlier. If the retirement system coverage group is made up of members who chose coverage, the newly created or reclassified position is a part of the coverage group if it is occupied by a member who chose coverage or by a new member.
### SUBCHAPTER XXVII—EUROPEAN BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT
### SUBCHAPTER XVI—UNITED NATIONS ORGANIZATION
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 HIGH

 2,836

 3,396

 5,309

 5,357

 4,296

 5,134

 4,808

 4,126

 3,337

 2,337

 1,902

 1,758

 4,317

 5,948

 6,703

 8,117

 9,976

 11,372

 12,364

 12,686

 11,833

 11,418

 9,560

 8,796

 7,352

 7,763

 7,349

 8,130

 7,975

 9,671

 10,677

 236

 312

 347

 345

 327

 414

 452

 471

 429

 437

 449

 358

 400

 475

 729

 805

 1,055

 1,172

 1,376

 1,395

 1,444

 1,397

 1,345

 1,380

 1,238

 1,604

 1,774

 2,083

 1,889

 1,836

 1,737

 621

 931

 1,212

 1,313

 1,403

 1,461

 1,467

 1,369

 1,291

 1,097

 977

 878

 1,117

 1,566

 2,188

 3,066

 3,937

 4,877

 5,087

 5,085

 4,848

 4,709

 3,967

 4,177

 3,836

 3,666

 3,635

 3,873

 4,193

 4,436

 4,621

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

JULY 2005 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: August 2, 2005

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

PITTSBURG BOTTOM ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER