alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: Tommy Wilkerson
To: Brent Ruminski Subject: RE: Carrizo Presentation CBI Clarification for EPA
Date: Monday, May 04, 2015 12:25:16 PM

Brent,

There is nothing in this presentation that is confidential, please feel free to use any or all of it.

Thanks,

Tommy Wilkerson Water and Drill Solids Manager US
Carrizo Oil& Gas
500 Dallas Street
Suite 2300 Houston, TX 77002 Office-713-358-6233
Cell- 337-501-2090 Tommy.wilkerson@crzo.net

From: Brent Ruminski [mailto:Brent.Ruminski@erg.com] Sent: Monday, May 04, 2015 11:12 AM To: Tommy Wilkerson Subject: RE: Carrizo Presentation CBI Clarification for EPA

From: Brent Ruminski Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 4:50 PM To: 'Tommy.Wilkerson@crzo.net' Subject: Carrizo Presentation CBI Clarification for EPA

Hi Tommy,

My name is Brent Ruminski and I work for Eastern Research Group, Inc., a contractor for the United States Environmental Protection Agency. We are supporting EPA with a proposed effluent guideline (ELG) rulemaking for the unconventional oil and gas extraction industry ( http://water.epa.gov/scitech/wastetech/guide/oilandgas/unconv.cfm ).

In 2013, we participated in the Produced Water Reuse Initiative in Denver, CO at which you presented. We retrieved your presentation titled: Strategies for Sustainable Water Transport Lessons Learned in the Marcellus Applied to the Niobrara . In the technical development document that supports the proposed rulemaking, we have cited this presentation as it contains useful information. However, we recently noticed that the word “confidential” appears in the footer on some slides. Can you please confirm that this report is not considered confidential business information (CBI)? If this report is not considered CBI, then it will be included in the public record atwww.regulations.gov under the document control number (DCN): SGE00638.A12.

Thank you,

Brent Ruminski Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG) 14555 Avion Parkway Suite 200 Chantilly, VA 20151 703-633-1701 (office)
#### § 2806.21 When and how are counties or other geographical areas assigned to a County Zone Number and Per Acre Zone Value?

Counties (or other geographical areas) are assigned to a County Zone Number and Per Acre Zone Value based upon 80 percent of their average per acre land and building value published in the Census of Agriculture (Census) by the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS). The initial assignment of counties to the zones will cover years 2006 through 2010 of the Per Acre Rent Schedule and is based upon data contained in the most recent NASS Census (2002). Subsequent re-assignments of counties will occur every 5 years (in 2011 based upon 2007 NASS Census data, in 2016 based upon 2012 NASS Census data, and so forth) following the publication of the NASS Census.

[73 FR 65071, Oct. 31, 2008]
#### § 1822.11 What must I do to make an official filing with BLM?

You must file your application and any other required documents during regular office hours at the appropriate BLM office having jurisdiction over the lands or records involved. You must file any document with BLM through personal delivery or by mailing via the United States Postal Service or other delivery service, except for those applications that may be filed electronically under § 1822.13, unless a more specific regulation or law specifies the mode of delivery. The date of mailing is not the date of filing.
#### Blackburn v. Blackburn.

May 14, 1943.

*313Willis Staton for appellant.

Jean Auxier for appellee.

Opinion op the Court by

Stanley, Commissioner

Affirming.

Warnie Blackburn appeals from a judgment dismissing his suit for divorce from Nola Blackburn and allowing her attorney a $50 fee. This suit, based upon charges of adultery and lewd and lascivious conduct, was filed less than two weeks after the court had dismissed his suit based upon the ground of abandonment.

There is no evidence of adultery. The other ground upon which the law authorizes a divorce to the husband is not merely lewd or lascivious behavior. It is such conduct of that character “as proves her to be unchaste.” This ground relieves the husband of the more difficult burden of proving actual adultery. It authorizes the conclusion or deduction from proof of the wife’s behavior, specific or general, that she is in fact unchaste. This requires proof of facts of an indecent character or evidence which does more than create a mere suspicion of culpability. As stated in Anderson v. Anderson, 152 Ky. 773, 151 S. W. 1, 3, it is not sufficient to prove neighborhood gossip or reputation, or of indiscretions which “were not of so lascivious a character as to demonstrate her lack of chastity.” The wife may not be condemned if her acts may be reasonably reconciled with the presumption of innocence. Grove v. Grove, 239 Ky. 32, 39 S. W. (2d) 193.

The evidence does not meet the standard. The evidence of misconduct was confined to a certain night when the defendant and a number of neighbors were sitting up with a corpse, and to her apparent interest in a man who operated a taxicab service between the community in which the parties lived and Pikeville. The evidence as to the first instance is wholly lacking in merit and substance and is refuted by the circumstances and positive testimony. The evidence as to the wife’s relations with the taxicab man establish friendliness and flirtation, *314and some talk which, cannot be regarded as decorous or discreet. That and its implications, however, were denied.

"We concur in the conclusion of the chancellor that the plaintiff did not establish his right to a divorce.

Wherefore the judgment is affirmed.
§ 2805.16 If I hold a grant, what cost recovery fees must I pay? ( a ) You must pay a fee to the BLM for the reasonable costs the Federal Government incurs in processing, inspecting, and monitoring the construction, operation, maintenance, and termination of the project and protection and rehabilitation of the public lands that your grant covers. Instead of paying the BLM a fee for the reasonable costs incurred by other Federal agencies in processing or monitoring your grant, you may pay the other Federal agencies directly for such costs. The BLM will annually adjust the Category 1 through 4 cost recovery fees in the manner described at § 2804.14(b). The BLM will update Category 5 cost recovery fees as specified in the applicable Master Agreement. Category 6 cost recovery fees are addressed at § 2805.17(c). The BLM categorizes the cost recovery fees based on the estimated number of work hours necessary to process and monitor your grant. Category 1 through 4 cost recovery fees are not refundable. The Federal work hours for each category and their descriptions are found at § 2804.14(b).
( b ) The BLM will update the cost recovery fee schedule for Categories 1 through 4 each calendar year, based on the previous year's change in the IPD-GDP, as measured second quarter to second quarter and rounded to the nearest dollar. The BLM will update Category 5 cost recovery fees as specified in the applicable Master Agreement.
( c ) You may obtain a copy of the current year's cost recovery fee schedule from any BLM state, district, or field office, or by writing: Attention to the Division of Lands, Realty and Cadastral Survey, U.S. Department of the Interior, Director (HQ-350), Bureau of Land Management, 1849 C Street NW, Mail Stop 2134LM, Washington, DC 20240. The BLM also posts the current cost recovery fee schedule at *https://www.blm.gov .*
[89 FR 25963, Apr., 12, 2024]
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

 2,333.03

 2,332.83

 2,332.64

 2,332.46

 2,332.30

 2,332.14

 2,331.97

 2,331.80

 2,331.65

 2,331.52

 2,331.39

 2,331.26

 2,331.15

 2,331.02

 2,330.89

 2,330.78

 2,330.68

 2,330.57

 2,330.46

 2,330.36

 2,330.27

 2,330.18

 2,330.09

 2,329.99

 2,329.87

 2,329.77

 2,329.67

 2,329.58

 2,329.49

 2,329.34

 2,329.16

 1,887.5

 1,884.7

 1,882.0

 1,879.5

 1,877.3

 1,875.1

 1,872.7

 1,870.4

 1,868.3

 1,866.5

 1,864.7

 1,862.9

 1,861.4

 1,859.6

 1,857.8

 1,856.3

 1,854.9

 1,853.4

 1,851.9

 1,850.5

 1,849.3

 1,848.0

 1,846.8

 1,845.4

 1,843.8

 1,842.4

 1,841.0

 1,839.8

 1,838.6

 1,836.5

 1,834.1

STORAGE

-2.8

-2.8

-2.6

-2.5

-2.2

-2.2

-2.4

-2.4

-2.1

-1.8

-1.8

-1.8

-1.5

-1.8

-1.8

-1.5

-1.4

-1.5

-1.5

-1.4

-1.2

-1.2

-1.2

-1.4

-1.6

-1.4

-1.4

-1.2

-1.2

-2.1

-2.5

CHANGE

-412

-43

121

183

243

237

32

-41

119

189

154

142

130

19

62

135

273

79

-4

50

264

208

223

364

238

349

416

612

625

377

280

INFLOW

 895

 1,348

 1,374

 1,395

 1,315

 1,325

 1,173

 1,099

 1,104

 1,050

 1,015

 987

 848

 876

 891

 882

 889

 793

 715

 715

 860

 792

 799

 1,029

 1,030

 1,011

 1,082

 1,217

 1,230

 1,392

 1,506

POWER

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

OUTLET

 102

 12

 78

 49

 49

 33

 49

 45

 61

 45

 45

 61

 49

 49

 73

 16

 77

 49

 44

 28

 28

 40

 48

 28

 36

 28

 24

 16

 16

 20

 16

C.F.S.

 .25

 .03

 .19

 .12

 .12

 .08

 .12

 .11

 .15

 .11

 .11

 .15

 .12

 .12

 .18

 .04

 .19

 .12

 .11

 .07

 .07

 .10

 .12

 .07

 .09

 .07

 .06

 .04

 .04

 .05

 .04

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .04

 .04

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .33

 .00

 .25

 .08

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

OCTOBER 2005 TRINITY LAKE DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: March 14, 2006

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS -56.2 5,624 32,637 0 0 1,314 3.24 .74

ACRE-FEET -56,200 11,155 64,735 0 0 2,606

COMMENTS:

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

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 64,735

SPILL 0

OUTLET

TOTAL

 0

 64,735

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 .74

JULY 1, 2005 .74

 1,890.3

Table 4

(1) (1)
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

DAY ELEV

 508.04

 508.90

 509.27

 509.08

 508.83

 508.72

 508.52

 508.59

 508.87

 508.67

 506.00

 508.35

 508.22

 508.09

 507.81

 507.41

 507.15

 506.88

 506.73

 507.01

 506.96

 506.88

 506.41

 506.00

 505.64

 505.40

 505.46

 505.00

 505.73

 505.31

 64,538

 65,597

 66,057

 65,820

 65,511

 65,375

 65,129

 65,215

 65,560

 65,314

 62,083

 64,920

 64,760

 64,600

 64,259

 63,774

 63,459

 63,134

 62,955

 63,289

 63,229

 63,134

 62,573

 62,083

 61,660

 61,377

 61,448

 60,907

 61,765

 61,272

STORAGE

-899

+1,059

+460

-237

-309

-136

-246

+86

+345

-246

-3,231

+2,837

-160

-160

-341

-485

-315

-325

-179

+334

-60

-95

-561

-490

-423

-283

+71

-541

+858

-493

CHANGE

1,174

2,164

1,834

1,500

1,470

1,515

1,501

1,645

1,720

1,407

-87

2,993

1,537

1,516

1,416

1,225

1,254

1,221

1,242

1,447

1,254

1,111

916

968

1,009

1,027

1,124

830

1,527

694

INFLOW

 1,613

 1,613

 1,588

 1,606

 1,613

 1,570

 1,612

 1,590

 1,536

 1,523

 1,532

 1,554

 1,607

 1,588

 1,578

 1,463

 1,401

 1,379

 1,286

 1,078

 1,273

 1,151

 1,191

 1,206

 1,213

 1,163

 1,083

 1,095

 1,086

 933

POWER

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 36

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 189

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

OUTLET

 14

 17

 14

 13

 13

 14

 13

 12

 10

 8

 10

 9

 11

 9

 10

 7

 12

 6

 10

 12

 11

 8

 8

 9

 9

 7

 5

 8

 8

 10

C.F.S.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

SEPTEMBER 2005 TULLOCH RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: 03/14/2006

RES.

EVAP

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S. 

TOTALS -4,165 40,154 41,724 36 189 307

ACRE-FEET -4,165 79,645 82,760 71 375 609

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 82,760

SPILL 71 83,206

 65,437

OUTLET 375

TOTAL 

NEW

MELONES

RELEASE (1)

 1,296

 2,223

 1,943

 1,587

 1,576

 1,655

 1,617

 1,726

 1,772

 1,516

 46

 3,059

 1,557

 1,597

 1,506

 1,338

 1,351

 1,315

 1,348

 1,583

 1,286

 1,258

 994

 1,041

 1,013

 1,033

 1,122

 846

 1,584

 790

 42,578

 84,453

*COMPUTED INFLOW IS SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES, AND EVAPORATION.
Table 21
                                         U. S. Department of Interior - Bureau of Reclamation
                                                 Central Valley Operations Office

                                         Central Valley Project - California
Monthly Diversions in AF                                 2005

                             Jan     Feb     Mar     Apr     May     Jun     Jul     Aug     Sep     Oct     Nov     Dec    Total

CANALS

Contra Costa                 6503   10143    2444    7761   16498   19980   17289   15234   10660   11462    4809     740   123523
Delta-Mendota              259293  215968  207613  125999   65875  247959  268964  271049  259526  266552  254621  262410  2705829
Actual Fed Dos Amigos       33327   50829   64863   85692  107819  207380  240410  185960   66365   56614   46503   65190  1210952
Madera                        397    4032    3618   18938   53493   64253   66231   48189   27690   17949    2013       0   306803
Friant-Kern                 41352  145101  150564  214829  234957  260608  284648  239841  120303   56928   22174   11532  1782837
Corning                         0     111      67     651     770    2610    4044    4009    2723    1565     224       0    16774
Folsom-South                 1496    1932    2446    2267    2577    2765    2995    3065    2678    3380    3148    2579    31328
Tehama-Colusa                   0     785    2852   12290   30992   56268   61098   43004   21295   10201    1492     585   240862

CACHUMA PROJECT

Tecolete Tunnel              1224    1389    1514    2966    2761    2969    2958    2762    2321    1885    1527    1710    25986


ORLAND PROJECT

Stony Creek                     0       0       0    2920    5918   16267   18432   17340   15117    9939     617       0    86550
South Canal                     0       0       0    2309    4405   11231   12747   11909    9879    6153     466       0    59099
North Canal                     0       0       0     611    1513    5036    5685    5431    5238    3786     151       0    27451


SOLANO PROJECT

Putah South Canal            3350    3223    4197   11389   21158   30895   36780   32000   19446    8797    1767    2945   175947


NA = Not Available at time of printing report.
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

DAY HIGH

 522

 530

 535

 519

 490

 458

 477

 507

 509

 508

 475

 466

 446

 468

 461

 494

 536

 571

 575

 578

 615

 610

 617

 637

 659

 651

 647

 643

 678

 657

 488

 487

 494

 472

 440

 404

 429

 431

 440

 439

 419

 427

 407

 414

 413

 442

 491

 536

 532

 545

 549

 553

 558

 589

 575

 570

 604

 589

 606

 600

 502

 508

 518

 495

 463

 436

 450

 473

 486

 466

 446

 444

 431

 447

 441

 476

 517

 555

 552

 564

 588

 575

 589

 616

 613

 628

 625

 621

 644

 623

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

JUNE 2000 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: July 12, 2000

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

UNION ISLAND ON OLD RIVER AT MIDDLE RIVER
Exhibit 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                                   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  City  Network,   Inc.  (the
"Registrant")  on Form  10-KSB/A for the ten months  ended  December 31, 2004 as
filed with the  Securities and Exchange  Commission  (the  "Report"),  I, Yun-Yi
Tseng, Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that,
to the best of 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 Registrant as of and for the period covered by the Report.

     Pursuant  to the rules  and  regulations  of the  Securities  and  Exchange
Commission, this certification is being furnished and is not deemed filed.

                                          /s/ Yun-Yi Tseng
                                          -------------------------------
                                          Yun-Yi Tseng
January 27, 2006                          Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32











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 amended Annual Report of Li-ion Motors Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended July 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Stacey Fling,  Chief  Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer of the  Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of 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 result of  operations of the Company.




/s/ Stacey FlingStacey FlingChief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer





September 15, 2011
§ 30.273 What action will the judge take to record title? After receiving the certificate and supporting documents, the judge will: ( a ) Issue an order that the United States holds title to the interests in trust for the tribe;
( b ) File the complete record, including the decision, with the LTRO as provided in § 30.233;
( c ) Furnish a duplicate copy of the record to the agency; and
( d ) Mail a notice of the action together with a copy of the decision to each interested party.
§ 2.25 What if the requested records contain both exempt and nonexempt material? If responsive records contain both exempt and nonexempt material, the bureau will consult with the Office of the Solicitor, as discussed in § 2.23(c). After consultation, the bureau will partially grant and partially deny the request by: ( a ) Segregating and releasing the nonexempt information, unless the nonexempt material is so intertwined with the exempt material that disclosure of it would leave only meaningless words and phrases;
( b ) Indicating on the released portion of the record the amount of information deleted and the FOIA exemption under which the deletion was made, unless doing so would harm an interest protected by the FOIA exemption used to withhold the information; and
( c ) If technically feasible, indicating the amount of information deleted and the FOIA exemption under which the deletion was made at the place in the record where the deletion was made.
[77 FR 76902, Dec. 31, 2012, as amended at 81 FR 11129, Mar. 3, 2016]
#### § 1882.7 Inspection and audit.

Upon receipt of a loan under this subpart, the grantee of the loan shall establish accounts and related records necessary to record the transactions relating to receipt and disposition of such loan. These accounts and related records shall be sufficiently detailed to provide an adequate inspection and audit by the Secretary and the Comptroller General of the United States. The loan funds shall not be commingled with other funds of the recipient.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6389

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JINKINS HOPKINS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge. (CR-99-341, CA-01-4177-3-19) Submitted: July 30, 2002 Decided: August 22, 2002 Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jinkins Hopkins, Appellant Pro Se. Mark C. Moore, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Jinkins Hopkins seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). He raises a claim under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), asserting that his sentence on three charges arising out of a marijuana conspiracy violates the statutory maximum set forth in 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(4) (2000). The decision in Apprendi issued prior to Hopkins' conviction, and he did not object to his sentence in light of Apprendi . Accordingly, this claim is procedurally barred. See Bousley v. United States , 523 U.S. 614, 622 (1998); United States v. Sanders , 247 F.3d 139, 145 (4th Cir.), cert. denied , U.S. , 122 S. Ct. 573 (2001). Thus, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### § 2611.1-5 Priority of Carey Act applications.

Properly filed applications under § 2611.1-1 or § 2611.1-3 of this title shall have priority over any subsequently filed agricultural applications for lands within the project boundaries. However, the rejection of a Carey Act application will not preclude subsequent agricultural development under another authority.
#### § 684.820 What rules apply to administrative costs under the Indian and Native American program?

The definition and treatment of administrative costs are covered in §§ 683.205(b) and 683.215 of this chapter.
§ 2546.3 Payment and publication. ( a ) Before lands may be sold to a qualified preference-right claimant, the claimant will be required to pay the purchase price of the lands and will be required to publish once a week for four consecutive weeks, at his expense, in a designated newspaper and in a designated form, a notice allowing all persons having objections to file with the Authorizing officer of the State Office at Boise, Idaho, their objections to issuance of patent to the claimant. A protestant must serve on the claimant a copy of the objections and must furnish the Authorizing officer with evidence of such service.
( b ) Among other things, the notice will describe the lands to be patented, state the purchase price for the lands and the reservations, if any, to be included in the patent to preserve public recreational values in the lands.
( c ) The claimant must file a statement of the publisher, accompanied by a copy of the notice published, showing that publication has been had for the required time.