alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 678.736 How does the Governor establish a cost allocation methodology used to determine the one-stop partner programs' proportionate shares of infrastructure costs under the State one-stop infrastructure funding mechanism?

Once the appropriate budget is determined for a local area through either method described in § 678.735 (by acceptance of a budget agreed upon in local negotiation or by the Governor applying the formula detailed in § 678.745), the Governor must determine the appropriate cost allocation methodology to be applied to the one-stop partners in such local area, consistent with the Federal cost principles permitted under 2 CFR part 200, to fund the infrastructure budget.
*After examining appellant’s brief 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)(2) and 10th Cir. R.

34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. 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Order and Judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of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

JUN 12 2003

PATRICK FISHER

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

MILTON VERAN WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

THE CITY OF GUTHRIE,

OKLAHOMA; LOGAN COUNTY

DISTRICT ATTORNEY; LOGAN

COUNTY SHERIFF’S

DEPARTMENT; MARVIN QUINN,

Oklahoma Indigent Defense System;

VINCENT ANTONIOLI, Logan

County District Attorney; REX

BROWN; MARK BRUNING;

RICHARD FULTON; MIKE

COURTRIGHT; DEXTER PUGH;

DAVID TUCKER; STEVE MIZE;

TUCKER HODGSON,

Defendants - Appellees.

No. 02-6332

(D.C. No. CIV-01-1918-C)

(W.D. Okla.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*
- 2 -

Before EBEL, HENRY and HARTZ, Circuit Judges.

Plaintiff Milton Veran Williams is currently incarcerated in the Cimarron

Correctional Facility in Cushing, Oklahoma. Proceeding pro se, he filed the

instant action asking the Western District of Oklahoma to issue a temporary

restraining order or preliminary injunction enjoining the Defendants “from

transporting him or housing him and from adjudicating claims against him

pending in ‘the Logan County Court arena.’” (Magistrate’s Report and

Recommendation at 1.) He also requested an order “‘prohibiting Defendants or

their agents from further retaliation against Plaintiff.’” (Id. (quoting Motion for

TRO at 1).) He alleges that the Defendants previously violated his constitutional

rights and will do so again if he is transferred back to “the Logan County Court

arena.”

The Magistrate Judge recommended that Plaintiff’s motion be denied,

finding that “Plaintiff has wholly failed to carry his burden of proof and

persuasion.” (Id. at 2.) The district court adopted the Magistrate’s Report and

Recommendation in its entirety and denied Plaintiff’s motion. (Slip Op. at 2.)

We review a district court’s denial of a preliminary injunction or a

temporary restraining order for abuse of discretion. Duvall v. Keating, 162 F.3d

1058, 1062 (10th Cir. 1998). For substantially the reasons stated in the

Magistrate’s Report and Recommendation, we find that the district court did not
- 3 -

abuse its discretion and AFFIRM its denial of Plaintiff’s motion. Plaintiff’s

motion to proceed without prepayment of the appellate filing fee is GRANTED;

Plaintiff must continue making payments until the entire filing fee is paid. 

Plaintiff’s motion to file a supplemental brief is GRANTED. All other pending

motions are DENIED.

ENTERED FOR THE COURT

David M. Ebel

Circuit Judge
No. 11,698.

#### Poudre Valley Furniture Co. *v.*Craw.

Decided December 13, 1926.

Action in replevin. Judgment for defendant.

*Affirmed.*

*On Application for Supersedeas.*

1. *Contract*— Fraud. Fraud or misrepresentation as an inducement to enter into a contract, may be Bhown.

2. Principal and *Agent*— Ratification. A principal may ratify the unauthorized act of his agent, and thus make good a contract claimed not to have been valid in its incipieney.

*Error to the Cou/nty Court of Larimer County, Hon. G. Warren Culver, Judge.*

*354Mr. Thomas J. Warren, for plaintiff in error.

Mr. Mortimer Stone, for defendant in error.

*En banc.*

Mr. Justice Adams

delivered the opinion of the court.

Poudre Valley Furniture Company brought an action in replevin against Mrs. Craw, before a justice of the peace, to recover possession of a sweeper, sold on instalments under an agreement that the seller would retain ■title until the full purchase price had been paid. The company lost the suit, appealed to the county court, lost again, and now brings the case here for review, asking for a supersedeas.

Mrs. Craw had another sweeper and the selling agent agreed to take her old one, at an allowance of thirty dollars on the price of the new; otherwise she would not have bought. Mrs. Craw had the old one shipped from Denver to plaintiff at Fort Collins; plaintiff received and uncrated it, kept it for several months in its store, and then attempted to return it on the ground that the agent was not authorized to take it in trade. Mrs. Craw had made payments and refused to take the old article back; plaintiff then sued to recover the new one.

Fraud or misrepresentation as an inducement to enter into a contract may be shown. A principal may ratify an unauthorized act of his agent, and thus make good a contract claimed not to have been valid .in its incipiency. This is what happened when the company kept the old sweeper for several months. Both of these propositions are elementary.

The case might well have ended with the final judgment of the county court. Supersedeas denied and judgment affirmed.

Mr. Chief Justice Allen not participating.
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4413 

To prohibit the use of funds to provide assistance to the Pacific Islands 

Forum Fisheries Agency under the Agreement Between the Government 

of the United States of America and the Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries 

Agency, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 1, 2016 

Mr. HUNTER (for himself and Mr. VARGAS) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

A BILL 

To prohibit the use of funds to provide assistance to the 

Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency under the Agreement Between the Government of the United States of 

America and the Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency, 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. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Fairness to United 

5 States Distant Water Fishermen Act of 2016’’. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4413 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS TO PROVIDE AS2 SISTANCE TO THE PACIFIC ISLANDS FORUM 

3 FISHERIES AGENCY UNDER THE AGREEMENT 

4 BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE 

5 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE PA6 CIFIC ISLANDS FORUM FISHERIES AGENCY. 

7 (a) PROHIBITION.—Funds made available to carry 

8 out chapter 4 of part II of the Foreign Assistance Act 

9 of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2346 et seq.; relating to Economic 

10 Support Fund) may not be used to provide assistance to 

11 the Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency under the 

12 Agreement Between the Government of the United States 

13 of America and the Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agen14 cy. 

15 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This section takes effect on 

16 the date of the enactment of this Act and applies with 

17 respect to funds made available for any fiscal year— 

18 (1) in which a notice of intent to withdraw from 

19 the Treaty on Fisheries Between the Governments of 

20 Certain Pacific Island States and the Government of 

21 the United States of America, done at Port Moresby 

22 on April 2, 1987, is submitted by the United States 

23 in accordance with Article 12.6 of such Treaty; or 

24 (2) in which such Treaty is not in effect with 

25 respect to the United States for any part of such fis26 cal year. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4413 IH

1 SEC. 3. PROHIBITION ON ASSISTANCE TO FOREIGN COUN2 TRIES THAT ARE PARTIES TO THE SOUTH PA3 CIFIC FORUM FISHERIES AGENCY CONVEN4 TION. 

5 Funds made available to carry out chapter 5 of part 

6 II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2347 

7 et seq.; relating to International Military Education and 

8 Training) or any other provision of law for fiscal years 

9 2016 and 2017 may not be used to provide assistance to 

10 any foreign country that is a party to the South Pacific 

11 Forum Fisheries Agency Convention, signed at Honiara 

12 on July 10, 1979. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 8 D0 09 9 . FRANK LESLI E BOND I I I v . J ULI ET W I NDHAM BOND.

Fran k Les l ie Bo n d III s eek s d i s cret io n ary rev i e w o f t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s o rd er

g ra nting Juliet W i n d h am Bo n d’ s m o t i o n fo r t em p orary al i m o n y , ex t en d i n g d i s co v ery ,

an d res erv i n g t h e i s s u e o f at t o rn ey fees u nt i l th e t ri al o f t hi s d i vo rce cas e. Becau s e

t h e cas e rem ai n s p en d i n g b el o w, Fran k Bo n d was req u ired t o fo l l ow t h e i n t erl o cu t o ry

ap p eal pro ced u re t o o b tai n ap pel l at e rev i ew at t h is ju n ct u re. See Ba i l ey v. Ba i l ey , 2 6 6

Ga. 8 3 2, 8 3 2 (4 7 1 SE2 d 2 1 3) (1 9 9 6 ) (“ a n o r d e r a ward i n g t em p o rary al i m o n y i s

i n t erl o cu t o ry an d

, t h erefo re, s u b ject t o t he req u i rem en t s o f t h e i n t erl o cu t o ry ap p eal

p ro ced ure of OCGA § 5 -6 -3 4 (b )”); s ee al s o Mi l ler v. Mi l l er , 28 2 Ga. 1 6 4, 1 6 5 (6 4 6

SE2 d 4 69 ) (2 00 7 ). Al t h o u g h h e fi l ed an ap p l icat i o n fo r d i s cret i o n ary ap p eal

,

co m p l ian ce wi t h th e di s c ret i o nary ap p eal s t at u t e, O CGA § 5-6 -3 5

, d o es n o t ex cu s e

a p art y s e ek i n g ap p el l at e rev i ew o f an in t erl o cu t o ry ord er fro m co m p l y i n g wi t h t h e

ad d it i o n al req ui rem en t s o f OCGA § 5 -6 -3 4 (b ). See Ba i l ey , 2 6 6 Ga. at 8 3 3

. Fran k

Bo n d ’ s fai l u re t o fo l l o w t h e i n t erl o cu to ry ap p eal p ro ced u re d ep ri v es u s o f j u ri s d i ct i o n

o v er t h i s d i s cret i o n ary ap p l icat i o n , wh ich i s h ereb y DISM ISSED.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O f f i c e

, A t la n t a

,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t if y t h a t th e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t

h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. October 10, 2017

10/10/2017
#### § 680.650 Do veterans receive priority of service under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act?

Yes, veterans, as defined under WIOA sec. 3(63)(A) and 38 U.S.C. 101, receive priority of service in all Department of Labor-funded training programs under 38 U.S.C. 4215 and described in 20 CFR part 1010. A veteran still must meet each program's eligibility criteria to receive services under the respective employment and training program. For income-based eligibility determinations, amounts paid while on active duty or paid by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for vocational rehabilitation, disability payments, or related VA-funded programs are not to be considered as income, in accordance with 38 U.S.C. 4213 and § 683.230 of this chapter.
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 Form 10-K of Redpoint Bio Corporation (the "Company") for the period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Scott Horvitz, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



|Dated: March 14, 2008 |  | /s/SCOTT HORVITZ*Scott Horvitz, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
|--------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

---



QuickLinks
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

 130.55

 130.58

 130.56

 130.69

 130.58

 130.65

 130.76

 130.66

 130.57

 130.57

 130.57

 130.49

 130.71

 130.71

 130.66

 130.64

 130.64

 130.75

 130.77

 130.62

 130.62

 130.78

 130.76

 130.69

 130.58

 130.61

 130.65

 130.64

 130.72

 130.68

 130.71

 639

 642

 640

 655

 642

 650

 663

 651

 641

 641

 641

 632

 657

 657

 651

 649

 649

 662

 664

 646

 646

 665

 663

 655

 642

 645

 650

 649

 658

 654

 657

STORAGE

-5

+3

-2

+15

-13

+8

+13

-12

-10

+0

+0

-9

+25

+0

-6

-2

+0

+13

+2

-18

+0

+19

-2

-8

-13

+3

+5

-1

+9

-4

+3

CHANGE

279

289

302

319

331

358

411

418

431

419

402

410

394

382

372

385

405

433

434

403

444

479

451

414

418

415

395

439

453

479

477

INFLOW

 63

 58

 54

 51

 48

 45

 43

 43

 43

 43

 43

 43

 43

 43

 43

 43

 43

 43

 43

 46

 52

 57

 56

 55

 55

 55

 55

 55

 55

 55

 55

PUTAH

 218

 228

 248

 259

 289

 308

 360

 380

 392

 374

 358

 370

 336

 338

 331

 342

 361

 382

 389

 365

 391

 411

 395

 362

 369

 357

 336

 383

 391

 424

 418

PUTAH

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 2

 1

 2

 2

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 1

 2

 2

 2

 2

C.F.S.

 .23

 .22

 .28

 .29

 .28

 .25

 .26

 .33

 .35

 .42

 .34

 .60

 .43

 .30

 .29

 .37

 .13

 .30

 .35

 .34

 .26

 .20

 .29

 .34

 .27

 .13

 .20

 .38

 .52

 .51

 .40

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .01

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

MAY 2018 RUN DATE: 06/01/2018

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS +13 12,441 10,865 1,529 38 9.86 .01

ACRE-FEET +13 24,677 21,551 3,033 75

COMMENTS:

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

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

PUTAH CREEK 3,033

PUTAH SOUTH CANAL 21,551

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 .01

JULY 1, 2017 13.61

 644

LAKE SOLANO DAILY OPERATIONS

SOUTH CREEK

OCT 1, 2017 TO DATE = 13.61
#### Frank B. Torrey, as Executor of and Trustee under the Last Will and Testament of Edward Warren Day, Deceased, Respondent, v. Elbert H. Day and Others, Appellants.

Motion granted, without prejudice to the right of appellants to hereafter raise the point now presented in opposition. Present — Jenks, P. J., Burr, Thomas, Carr and Rich, JJ.
487 P.2d 1355

#### STATE of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alton Leon BREWTON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 694.

Court of Appeals of New Mexico.

July 30, 1971.

Roy G. Hill, Santa Fe, for defendant-appellant.

David L. Norvell, Atty. Gen., Thomas Patrick Whelan, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Santa Fe, for plaintiff-appellee.

OPINION

SUTIN, Judge.

Brewton seeks post conviction relief. He pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor committed *51in the state penitentiary while serving a prior sentence. He seeks credit on his sentence for the 28 days which elapsed between the day he was served with a warrant for his arrest and the day when judgment and sentence was entered on his plea of guilty. Reliance is placed on § 40A-29-25, N.M.S.A.1953 (Repl.Vol. 6, Supp.1969). This section is not applicable because his confinement during this period was pursuant to his prior sentence.

The trial court order which dismissed Brewton’s motion for amended judgment and sentence is affirmed.

It is so ordered.

WOOD, C. J., and HENDLEY, J., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Dean
Witter Cornerstone Fund III and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to sucyh financial instruments.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                      42,425,580
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  326,773<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              44,021,549<F2>
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                44,021,549<F3>
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             6,331,950<F4>
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,212,325
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              4,119,625
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              4,119,625
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 4,119,625
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Receivables include interst receivable of $144,095 and due from DWR
of $182,678.
<F2>In addition to cash and receivables, total assets include net unrealized
gain on open contracts of $1,309,371 and net option premiums of $(40,175).
<F3>Liabilities include redemptions payable of $367,445, accrued management
fees of $145,383, accrued brokerage commissions of $126,351, common
administrative expenses payable of $126,871 and accrued transaction fees
and costs of $8,098.
<F4>Total revenue includes realized trading revenue of $6,703,472, net
change in unrealized of $(1,271,430) and interest income of $899,908.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
November 2021

STORAGE COMPUTED* RELEASE - C.F.S.

 1000 ACRE - FEET INFLOW RIVER EVAPORATION PRECIP

DAY ELEV IN LAKE CHANGE C.F.S. POWER SPILL OUTLET C. F. S. INCHES INCHES

1,002.0

1 885.55 1,002.7 0.8 5,363 4,968 0 0 13 0.04 0.07

2 886.19 1,009.7 6.9 6,529 3,021 0 0 10 0.03 2.04

3 886.41 1,012.1 2.4 4,535 3,316 0 0 10 0.03 0.00

4 887.15 1,020.2 8.1 7,506 3,430 0 0 3 0.01 0.35

5 887.79 1,027.2 7.0 6,216 2,666 0 0 6 0.02 0.41

6 888.34 1,033.3 6.1 6,257 3,197 0 0 0 0.00 0.00

7 888.65 1,036.7 3.4 4,841 3,111 0 0 0 0.00 0.00

8 889.28 1,043.7 7.0 7,237 3,707 0 0 3 0.01 0.13

9 890.22 1,054.2 10.5 8,807 3,511 0 0 3 0.01 2.04

10 891.34 1,066.8 12.6 8,095 1,730 0 0 7 0.02 0.11

11 891.89 1,073.0 6.2 6,054 2,908 0 0 7 0.02 0.02

12 892.38 1,078.6 5.6 6,322 3,490 0 0 20 0.06 0.00

13 892.78 1,083.2 4.6 4,942 2,623 0 0 20 0.06 0.00

14 893.17 1,087.6 4.5 5,214 2,938 0 0 27 0.08 0.00

15 893.46 1,091.0 3.3 4,556 2,860 0 0 17 0.05 0.00

16 893.92 1,096.2 5.3 5,132 2,458 0 0 10 0.03 0.00

17 894.22 1,099.7 3.5 4,701 2,883 0 0 71 0.21 0.00

18 894.62 1,104.3 4.6 5,149 2,791 0 0 24 0.07 0.00

19 894.85 1,107.0 2.7 4,284 2,935 0 0 7 0.02 0.25

20 895.06 1,109.4 2.4 4,273 3,025 0 0 20 0.06 0.01

21 895.29 1,112.1 2.7 4,161 2,768 0 0 41 0.12 0.00

22 895.50 1,114.6 2.4 4,106 2,830 0 0 41 0.12 0.00

23 895.23 1,111.4 -3.1 976 2,543 0 0 20 0.06 0.00

24 895.27 1,111.9 0.5 2,994 2,718 0 0 41 0.12 0.00

25 895.42 1,113.6 1.7 4,034 3,121 0 0 31 0.09 0.00

26 895.51 1,114.7 1.0 4,013 3,474 0 0 10 0.03 0.00

27 895.60 1,115.7 1.0 3,453 2,900 0 0 24 0.07 0.00

28 895.63 1,116.1 0.4 3,191 2,998 0 0 17 0.05 0.00

29 895.67 1,116.5 0.5 3,531 3,275 0 0 21 0.06 0.00

30 895.73 1,117.2 0.7 3,087 2,708 0 0 27 0.08 0.00

TOTALS 115.3 149,559 90,903 0 0 551 1.63 5.43

ACRE-FEET 115,300 296,650 180,306 0 0 1,093

Comments: * COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES, PUMPING AND EVAPORATION

Release (ACRE-FEET)

Power 180,306 Outlet 0

Spill 0 Total 180,306

Precipitation

This month = 5.43

October 01, 2021 To date = 16.07

SUMMARY

Historical Archive and Report Database

Shasta Lake Daily Operations

Run Date: 4/19/2023
### §§72 to 79. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 72, R.S. §4082, which related to solemnization of marriages, was transferred to section 4192 of this title and subsequently repealed.

Section 73, R.S. §1707, which related to receipt of protests and declarations by consuls and vice-consuls, was transferred to section 4193 of this title.

Section 74, R.S. §1708, which related to lists and returns of seamen and vessels, was transferred to section 4194 of this title.

Section 75, R.S. §1709, which related to handling of estates of decedents by consular officers, was transferred to section 4195 of this title and subsequently repealed.

Section 76, R.S. §1710, which related to notification of death of a decedent by a consular officer, was transferred to section 4196 of this title.

Section 77, R.S. §1711, which related to following testamentary directions by a consular officer, was transferred to section 4197 of this title.

Section 78, act June 30, 1902, ch. 1331, §1, 32 Stat. 546, which related to appointment of a consular officer as a trust officer for settlement or conservation of an estate, was transferred to section 4198 of this title.

Section 79, act June 30, 1902, ch. 1331, §2, 32 Stat. 547, which related to failure of a consular officer to post bond prior to appointment as an administrator, was transferred to section 4199 of this title.