alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §5802. Definitions

In this chapter:

#### (1) Business incubator

The term "business incubator" means an organization that—

(A) provides physical workspace and facilities resources to startups and established businesses; and

(B) is designed to accelerate the growth and success of businesses through a variety of business support resources and services, including—

(i) access to capital, business education, and counseling;

(ii) networking opportunities;

(iii) mentorship opportunities; and

(iv) other services intended to aid in developing a business.

#### (2) Eligible applicant

The term "eligible applicant" means an applicant eligible to apply for a grant under section 5803(b) of this title.

#### (3) Indian tribe

The term "Indian tribe" has the meaning given the term in section 5304 of this title.

#### (4) Institution of higher education

The term "institution of higher education" has the meaning given the term in section 1001 of title 20.

#### (5) Native American; Native

The terms "Native American" and "Native" have the meaning given the term "Indian" in section 5304 of this title.

#### (6) Native business

The term "Native business" means a business concern that is at least 51-percent owned and controlled by 1 or more Native Americans.

#### (7) Native entrepreneur

The term "Native entrepreneur" means an entrepreneur who is a Native American.

#### (8) Program

The term "program" means the program established under section 5803(a) of this title.

#### (9) Reservation

The term "reservation" has the meaning given the term in section 1452 of this title.

#### (10) Secretary

The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of the Interior.

#### (11) Tribal college or university

The term "tribal college or university" has the meaning given the term "Tribal College or University" in section 1059c(b) of title 20.

(Pub. L. 116–174, §3, Oct. 20, 2020, 134 Stat. 839.)
Exhibit 32.2

          Certification pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) or 15d-14(b) of the
               Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. 1350

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

In connection with the amended quarterly report on Form 10-QSB/A of ELECTRONIC
SENSOR TECHNOLOGY, INC. (the "Company") for the period ended June 30, 2006 (the
"Report"), I, Francis Chang, Secretary, Treasurer and Vice President of Finance
and Administration, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(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.


Date: September  26, 2006
                                         /s/ Francis Chang
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                         Francis Chang
                                         Secretary, Treasurer and Vice President
                                         of Finance and Administration
COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS

IN THE INTEREST OF Z.M.H.,
A CHILD § § § § § § No. 08

- 14

- 00257

- CV

Appeal from
65th District Court of El Paso County, Texas (TC # 2012DCM02211)

MEMORANDUM OPINION This appeal is before the Court to determine whether it should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction

. Finding that Appellant did not timely file the notice of appeal , we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction

. A civil appeal is perfected when the notice of appeal is timely filed. T EX .R.A PP .P. 25.1, 26.1; see Restrepo v. First National Bank of Dona Ana County, N.M. , 892 S.W.2d 237, 238 (Tex.App.

- - El Paso 1995, no writ). If the notice of appeal is untimely, the appellate court lacks jurisdiction and must dismiss the case. See Charette v. Fitzgerald , 213 S.W.3d 505, 509 (Tex.App.

- - Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, no pet.). On July 25, 2014, the trial court entered an order terminating Appellant’s parental rights. By statute and by rule, this is an accelerated appeal. T EX .F AM .C ODE A NN

. § 109.002(a)(West 2014) ; T EX .R.A PP .P. 28.4(a)(2)

. In an accelerated appeal, the notice o f appeal must be filed within twenty days after the judgment or- 2

-

order is signed. T EX .R.A PP

. P. 26.1(b). Appellant ’ s notice of appeal was due to have been filed
not later than August 14, 2014, but he did not file it until September 4, 2014. An appellate c ourt may extend the time in which to file the notice of appeal provided it is filed with the trial court clerk within fifteen days after the deadline for filing the notice of appeal and a motion for extension of time if filed in the appellate court

. See T EX .R.A PP .P. 26.3. The notice of appeal was filed more than fifteen days after the deadline for filing it. Because Appellant ’ s notice of appeal was not filed by the due date or within fifteen days of the due date, we do not have jurisdiction of this appea l. The appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

October 8, 2014 ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Chief Justice Before McClure, C.J., Rivera, and Rodriguez, JJ. (Rivera, J., not participating)
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

DAY ELEV

 1,198.35

 1,198.40

 1,198.33

 1,198.25

 1,198.29

 1,198.33

 1,198.41

 1,198.51

 1,198.19

 1,198.85

 1,198.74

 1,198.65

 1,198.64

 1,198.56

 1,198.48

 1,198.36

 1,198.24

 1,198.10

 1,198.23

 1,198.23

 1,198.64

 1,198.70

 1,198.28

 1,198.62

 1,198.74

 1,198.32

 1,198.49

 1,198.52

 205.2

 205.4

 205.2

 204.9

 205.1

 205.2

 205.4

 205.7

 204.8

 206.7

 206.4

 206.1

 206.1

 205.9

 205.6

 205.3

 204.9

 204.5

 204.9

 204.9

 206.1

 206.3

 205.0

 206.0

 206.4

 205.2

 205.7

 205.7

STORAGE

+0.2

+0.1

-0.2

-0.2

+0.1

+0.1

+0.2

+0.3

-0.9

+1.9

-0.3

-0.3

+0.0

-0.2

-0.2

-0.4

-0.4

-0.4

+0.4

+0.0

+1.2

+0.2

-1.2

+1.0

+0.4

-1.2

+0.5

+0.1

CHANGE

365

349

170

157

335

334

391

406

442

1,513

1,250

702

507

372

370

312

312

283

684

269

975

1,800

958

969

825

694

700

550

INFLOW

 68

 68

 68

 68

 68

 68

 68

 65

 713

 329

 1,209

 632

 318

 283

 283

 283

 283

 283

 283

 62

 162

 1,507

 1,378

 257

 443

 1,111

 243

 302

PP

 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

 204

 204

 204

 204

 204

 204

 204

 193

 204

 204

 204

 204

 204

 204

 204

 204

 204

 204

 204

 204

 204

 204

 204

 204

 204

 204

 204

 204

OUTLETS

 4

 3

 2

 3

 4

 3

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 3

 2

 3

 3

 4

 4

 3

 0

 0

 0

 3

 0

 3

 0

 0

C.F.S.

 .05

 .03

 .02

 .04

 .05

 .04

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .04

 .02

 .04

 .04

 .05

 .05

 .04

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .03

 .00

 .03

 .00

 .00

INCHES

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

FEBRUARY 2007 WHISKEYTOWN LAKE DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: March 9, 2007

IN LAKE

EVAP.

C.F.S. * FRANCIS

COMPUTED

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S. 

TOTALS +0.8 16,994 5,701 0 10,905 47 .57

ACRE-FEET +0.8 33,708 11,308 0 21,630 93

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

(1) WATER TO CLEAR CREEK BEING DISCHARGED THROUGH 972.00-1110.00 ELEVATION OUTLET.

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 21,630

SPILL 0 32,938

 205.1

OUTLET 11,308

TOTAL

JUDGE

CARR PP

(1)

 270

 280

 73

 86

 248

 242

 71

 76

 79

 79

 79

 79

 79

 63

 55

 59

 60

 60

 495

 62

 59

 59

 90

 102

 102

 112

 105

 102

 3,326

 6,597

FROM

TO

SPRING CR.

TO CLEAR CR.

CLEAR

CR.

NATURAL

FLOW

 95

 69

 97

 71

 87

 92

 320

 363

 387

 1,434

 1,171

 623

 428

 309

 315

 253

 252

 223

 189

 207

 916

 1,741

 868

 867

 723

 582

 595

 448

 13,725

 27,224

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .21

 1.32

 1.31

 1.46

 2.00

 .01

 .14

 .01

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 1.53

 1.80

 .29

 .02

 1.58

 .05

 .12

 .61

 12.46

PRECIP

INCHES

PRECIPITATION

 12.46

 28.63

THIS MONTH

JULY 1, 2006 TO DATE
#### § 30.145 When can a judge reduce or disallow a claim?

The judge has discretion to decide whether part or all of an otherwise valid claim is unreasonable, and if so, to reduce the claim to a reasonable amount or disallow the claim in its entirety. If a claim is reduced, the judge will order payment only of the reduced amount.
EXHIBIT 31.2
                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Kevin Ericksteen, certify that:

1. I have  reviewed  this Form 10-KSB for the period ended  December 31, 2003 of
Unitech Energy Corporation;

2.  Based on my  knowledge,  this  annual  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 annual
report;

3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information  included  in this annual  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 annual report;

4.  The  registrant's  other  certifying  officers  and  I are  responsible  for
establishing and maintaining  disclosure  controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

     a)   designed  such  disclosure  controls  and  procedures  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 annual report
          is being prepared;

     b)   evaluated the  effectiveness of the registrant's  disclosure  controls
          and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
          this annual report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

     c)   presented   in  this   annual   report  our   conclusions   about  the
          effectiveness  of the disclosure  controls and procedures based on our
          evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

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

     a)   all  significant  deficiencies  in the design or operation of internal
          controls  which could  adversely  affect the  registrant's  ability to
          record,  process,   summarize  and  report  financial  data  and  have
          identified for the  registrant's  auditors any material  weaknesses in
          internal controls; and

     b)   any fraud, whether or not material,  that involves management or other
          employees who have a  significant  role in the  registrant's  internal
          controls; and

6. The  registrant's  other  certifying  officers  and I have  indicated in this
annual report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls
or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent
to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: March 15, 2004
/s/ Kevin Ericksteen
-------------------------
By: Kevin Ericksteen, CFO
### [§155. Repealed. Pub. L. 112–141, div. A, title I, §1519(b)(1)(A), July 6, 2012, 126 Stat. 575]

Section, added Pub. L. 93–643, §115(a), Jan. 4, 1975, 88 Stat. 2287; amended Pub. L. 95–599, title I, §129(e), Nov. 6, 1978, 92 Stat. 2708, related to access highways to public recreation areas on certain lakes.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective Oct. 1, 2012, see section 3(a) of Pub. L. 112–141, set out as an Effective and Termination Dates of 2012 Amendment note under section 101 of this title.
Exhibit 99.2
                                 ------------


                                      13


<PAGE>

                                                                  Exhibit 99.2


               REPORT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS ON MANAGEMENT'S
               -------------------------------------------------
           ASSERTION ON COMPLIANCE WITH MINIMUM SERVICING STANDARDS
           --------------------------------------------------------
            SET FORTH IN THE UNIFORM SINGLE ATTESTATION PROGRAM FOR
            -------------------------------------------------------
                               MORTGAGE BANKERS
                               ----------------



Board of Directors
Countrywide Credit Industries, Inc.

We have examined management's assertion about Countrywide Credit Industries,
Inc. and Subsidiaries (which includes its wholly-owned subsidiary, Countrywide
Home Loans, Inc. ("CHL"), and Countrywide Home Loans Servicing, L.P., a
wholly-owned subsidiary of CHL) ("the Company") compliance with the minimum
servicing standards identified in the Mortgage Bankers Association of
America's Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers (USAP) as of
and for the ten months ended December 31, 2001 included in the accompanying
management assertion. Management is responsible for the Company's compliance
with those minimum servicing standards. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on management's assertion about the entity's compliance based on our
examination.

Our examination was made in accordance with standards established by the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included
examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the
minimum servicing standards and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our examination
provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide
a legal determination on the Company's compliance with the minimum servicing
standards.

In our opinion, management's assertion that Countrywide Credit Industries,
Inc. and Subsidiaries (which includes its wholly-owned subsidiary, Countrywide
Home Loans, Inc., and Countrywide Home Loans Servicing, L.P., a wholly-owned
subsidiary of CHL) complied with the aforementioned minimum servicing
standards as of and for the ten months ended December 31, 2001 is fairly
stated, in all material respects.


/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP


Los Angeles, California
March 7, 2002


                                      14
!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

T25N

R114W

T26N

T27N

T28N

T29N

T30N

T31N

T32N

T33N

T34N

T35N

T36N

R113W R112W R111W R110W R109W R108W R107W R106W

UV352

UV354

UV353

UV350

UV351

£¤191

£¤189

UV235

Cora

Merna

Daniel

Boulder

Pinedale

LaBarge

Marbleton

Big Piney

NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY THE BLM FOR USE OF THE DATA FOR PURPOSES NOT INTENDED BY BLM.

o

0 2.5 5 10 15 20 25 30

Miles

Special Designations and Management Areas

Map 2-33

SUBLETTE

LINCOLN

0 5 10 20 30 40 50

Kilometers

Ross Butte

MA

Miller

Mountain

MA

Green River and

New Fork Rivers

SRMA

New Fork

Potholes ACEC

Trapper's

Point

ACEC

Beaver

Creek

ACEC

Upper

Green

River

SRMA

Boulder Lake

SRMA

Wind River

Front MA

Rock Creek

ACEC

Scab Creek

SRMA

Lake

Mountain

WSA

Scab

Creek

WSA

Alternative 4

CCC Ponds

SRMA

Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC)

Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA)

Wilderness Study Area (WSA)

Management Area (MA)
### §1300i–1. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 100–580, §2, Oct. 31, 1988, 102 Stat. 2925, which related to partition of the joint reservation and establishment of the Hoopa Valley Reservation and the Yurok Reservation, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
#### § 2569.100 What is the purpose of this subpart?

The purpose of this subpart is to implement section 1119 of the John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act of March 12, 2019, Public Law 116-9, codified at 43 U.S.C. 1629g-1, which allows Eligible Individuals to receive an allotment of a single parcel of available Federal lands in Alaska containing not less than 2.5 acres and not more than 160 acres.
Exhibit 32.1 Broadcast International, Inc. & Subsidiaries Certification Of Chief Executive 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 quarterly report of Broadcast International, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, Rodney M. Tiede, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  (1) The Form 10-Q 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 Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  Date: August 13, 2007  /s/ Rodney M. Tiede Rodney M. Tiede Chief Executive Officer
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

The undersigned, Paul Chung, Chief Financial Officer of Geocom Resources Inc., hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)	the annual report on Form 10-KSB of Geocom Resources Inc. for the year ended July 31, 2005 (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 Geocom Resources Inc.

Dated: November 10, 2005

/s/ Paul Chung 	Paul Chung
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)
RDU 

S10-10031 I-004 

RALEIGH-DURHA M AIRPOR T AUTHORIT Y 

100 0 Trad e Driv e * P O Do x 8O00 1 * RD U Airport . N C 2762 3 

John C. Brantley, Airport Director ,,,, ^ ,g.,g> 8,0.210 0 • i«x : (919) eao-ow s - www.rdu.com 

March 4, 2010 

The Honorable Raymond LaHood, Secretary 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, D.C. 20590 ^lOlO -00 ^ ^ ; 

Attn: Docket DOT-OST-2010^0034 ' 1 

Dear Secretary LaHood: 

I write in the capacity of Airport Director of Raleigh-Durham International Airport (RDU) 

to strongly support the application to the Department of Transportation of American and 

Japan Airlines for limited antitrust immunity of their proposed joint business agreement. 

In the international air transportation arena, the competition truly has become between 

the three alliances, supplanting that between individual airlines. Thus, competition and 

benefit to the consumer are maximized when the alliances are able to compete on an 

essentially equal footing. 

The Department recently concluded successful negotiations with the government of 

Japan on an "Open Skies" air service agreement, for which it is to be commended. 

Execution of that agreement was deferred, however, pending the Department's consideration of antitrust applications involving both of Japan's major international air carriers. 

Those applications have now been filed - Japan Airlines with American and ANA with 

Continental and United. We support equal treatment and approval of both applications, 

thus opening the door to execution and implementation of the new agreement. 

I also want to commend the Department on the substantial progress that has been 

made in recent months in negotiations with the European Union on the second stage of 

the U.S.-E.U. "Open Skies" agreement. Completion of that effort will provide benefits 

for airlines and consumers on both sides of the Atlantic, while ensuring that the many 

benefits that were provided in the first stage continue in the future. 

Thank you for your attention to and consideration of our position on this matter. 

Sincerely, 

r36nn C. Brantley 

Airport Director 

iohn.brantlev(3)rdu.com 

DURHAM VVA.;r COUN (-• 

ftoben D Tcer. Jf. Chaifnwn re , K ^."a•.^l• .' .• Cf .i.',' : 

TonilaF, Lipscomb. Treasijr!>r '.'; •>••• :'<'r>; -

DUUHAMCOUi^IV 

•• Tors-.^iy Hunt 

NAI fUGi!
#### § 2933.30 Rules of conduct.
§ 30.183 Who may receive a renounced interest in trust or restricted land if the land will descend pursuant to a valid will? A devisee may renounce an interest in trust or restricted land in favor of any one or more of the following: ( a ) A lineal descendant of the testator;
( b ) A co-owner;
( c ) The Tribe with jurisdiction over the interest; or
( d ) Any Indian.
§ 725.208 Determination of relationship; child. As used in this section, the term “beneficiary” means only a surviving spouse entitled to benefits at the time of death (see § 725.212), or a miner. An individual will be considered to be the child of a beneficiary if: ( a ) The courts of the State in which the beneficiary is domiciled (see § 725.231) would find, under the law they would apply, that the individual is the beneficiary's child; or
( b ) The individual is the legally adopted child of such beneficiary; or
( c ) The individual is the stepchild of such beneficiary by reason of a valid marriage of the individual's parent or adopting parent to such beneficiary; or
( d ) The individual does not bear the relationship of child to such beneficiary under paragraph (a), (b), or (c) of this section, but would, under State law, have the same right as a child to share in the beneficiary's intestate personal property; or
( e ) The individual is the natural son or daughter of a beneficiary but is not a child under paragraph (a), (b), or (c) of this section, and is not considered to be the child of the beneficiary under paragraph (d) of this section if the beneficiary and the mother or the father, as the case may be, of the individual went through a marriage ceremony resulting in a purported marriage between them which but for a legal impediment (see § 725.230) would have been a valid marriage; or
( f ) The individual is the natural son or daughter of a beneficiary but is not a child under paragraph (a), (b), or (c) of this section, and is not considered to be the child of the beneficiary under paragraph (d) or (e) of this section, such individual shall nevertheless be considered to be the child of the beneficiary if: ( 1 ) The beneficiary, prior to his or her entitlement to benefits, has acknowledged in writing that the individual is his or her son or daughter, or has been decreed by a court to be the parent of the individual, or has been ordered by a court to contribute to the support of the individual (see § 725.233(e)) because the individual is his or her son or daughter; or
( 2 ) Such beneficiary is shown by satisfactory evidence to be the father or mother of the individual and was living with or contributing to the support of the individual at the time the beneficiary became entitled to benefits.
#### § 2933.11 When must I obtain a Recreation Use Permit?

You must obtain a Recreation Use Permit for individual or group use of fee areas. These are sites where we provide or administer specialized facilities, equipment, or services related to outdoor recreation. You may visit these areas for the uses and time periods BLM specifies. We will post these uses and limits at the entrance to the area or site, and provide this information in the local BLM office with jurisdiction over the area or site. You may contact this office for permit information when planning your visit.