alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Small Business Administration [Declaration of Disaster #3632]
 As a result of the President's major disaster declaration on September 19, 2004, I find that Allegheny, Armstrong, Beaver, Butler, Centre, Clearfield, Cumberland, Dauphin, Indiana, Lackawanna, Luzerne, Lycoming, Northampton, Perry, Schuylkill, Susquehanna, Washington, Westmoreland, and Wyoming Counties in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania constitute a disaster area due to damages caused by Tropical Depression Ivan occurring on September 17, 2004, and continuing. Applications for loans for physical damage as a result of this disaster may be filed until the close of business on November 18, 2004 and for economic injury until the close of business on June 20, 2005 at the address listed below or other locally announced locations: U.S. Small Business Administration, Disaster Area 1 Office, 360 Rainbow Blvd., South 3rd Fl.,Niagara Falls, NY 14303-1192. In addition, applications for economic injury loans from small businesses located in the following contiguous counties may be filed until the specified date at the above location: Adams, Berks, Blair, Bradford, Bucks, Cambria, Cameron, Carbon, Clarion, Clinton, Columbia, Elk, Fayette, Franklin, Greene, Huntingdon, Jefferson, Juniata, Lancaster, Lawrence, Lebanon, Lehigh, Mercer, Mifflin, Monroe, Montour, Northumberland, Somerset, Sullivan, Union, Venango, Wayne, and York in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; Warren County in the State of New Jersey; Broome and Tioga Counties in the State of New York; Columbiana County in the State of Ohio; and Brooke, Hancock, Marshall, and Ohio Counties in the State of West Virginia. The interest rates are: PercentFor Physical Damage:Homeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere
6.375Homeowners Without Credit Available Elsewhere
3.187Businesses With Credit Available Elsewhere
5.800Businesses and Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.900Others (Including Non-Profit Organizations) With Credit Available Elsewhere
4.875For Economic Injury:Businesses and Small Agricultural Cooperatives Without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.900
 The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 363208. For economic injury the number is 9ZZ200 for Pennsylvania; 9ZZ100 for New Jersey; 9ZZ300 for New York; 9ZZ400 for Ohio; and 9ZZ500 for West Virginia. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 59002 and 59008). Dated: September 21, 2004. Herbert L. Mitchell, Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.


[FR Doc. 04-21906 Filed 9-29-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 26, 2019 

Nos. 04-19-00192-CR & 04-19-00193-CR

John Joe AVALOS, 

Appellant 

v. 

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 437th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas 

Trial Court Nos. 2018CR7068 & 2016CR10374 

Honorable Lori I. Valenzuela, Judge Presiding 

C O NSO L I D ATION OR D E R

Appellant has filed an unopposed motion to consolidate these appeals. We grant the 

motion and order Appeal Nos. 04-19-00192-CR and 04-19-00193-CR consolidated. 

The parties must file motions, briefs, and other pleadings as if the appeals were one but 

put both appeal numbers in the style of the case. The cases must be argued together in one brief, 

as in a single appeal, and if oral argument is requested and granted, the entire case must be 

argued as a single appeal, with the total time limit for each party equal to the ordinary time limit 

for a party in a single appeal. However, a separate record must be maintained in each appeal. If 

supplementation of the record becomes necessary, the supplemental material must be filed in 

each appeal to which it applies. The court will dispose of both appeals in the same judgment, 

opinion, and mandate. 

_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice 
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 26th day of June, 2019. 

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE, 

Clerk of Court
### §44a. Repealed. Pub. L. 94–454, §2(b), Oct. 2, 1976, 90 Stat. 1518

Section, act Feb. 13, 1936, ch. 66, 49 Stat. 1137, related to pay deductions of enlisted men and warrant officers on active list of Regular Army, not to exceed 25 cents, to be credited to permanent fund of United States Soldiers' Home [now United States Soldiers' and Airmen's Home] trust fund.
EXHIBIT 13.1

Certification by the Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Baidu.com, Inc. (the Company) on Form 20-F for the year ended
December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robin Yanhong Li, Chief Executive 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 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: May 30, 2007



|       |  |                        
|------ |  | -----------------------
|By:    |  | /s/ Robin Yanhong Li   
|Name:  |  | Robin Yanhong Li       
|Title: |  | Chief Executive Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Paul Margiotta, Appellant.

No opinion. Present—Carswell, Johnston, Adel, Taylor and Lewis, JJ.
### §1227. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 91–364, §7, July 31, 1970, 84 Stat. 689, which authorized the Secretary of the Interior to prescribe rules and regulations to carry out the provisions of this subchapter, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
Exhibit 31.2


                CERTIFICATION OF VICE PRESIDENT OF RESORT FINANCE


I, Michael A. Donald, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Choctaw Resort Development
Enterprise;

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-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the registrant and have:

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

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this annual 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 annual report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
recent fiscal year that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

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 and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal controls 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.


December 23, 2003                       /s/  Michael A. Donald
                                        -----------------------
                                             Michael A. Donald


                                     Vice President of Resort Finance
                                    (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
#### Caroline Reames, Appellant, v. City of New York, Respondent, et al., Defendants.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries suffered by plaintiff when she fell on an accumulation of snow and ice on the sidewalk at a bus stop, the jury rendered a verdict for defendants. Order denying plaintiff’s motion for a new trial because of the alleged misconduct of counsel, and in the interests of justice, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Ho opinion. Present — Carswell, Acting P. J., Johnston, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ.
§ 2911.0-5 Definitions. As used in this subpart, the term: ( a ) *Act* means the Act of May 24, 1928, as amended (49 U.S.C. Appendix, 211-213).
( b ) *Authorized officer* means any employee of the Bureau of Land Management who has been delegated the authority to perform the duties described in this subpart.
( c ) *Administrator* means the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration.
( d ) *Applicant* means any individual who is a citizen of the United States; a group or association of citizens of the United States; any corporation, organized under the laws of the United States or of any State, authorized to conduct business in the State in which the land involved is located; or a State or political subdivisions or instrumentality thereof, including counties and municipalities; who submits an application for an airport lease under this subpart.
( e ) *Public airport* means an airport open to use by all persons without prior permission of the airport lessee or operator, and without restrictions within the physical capacities of its available facilities.
Order filed September 15, 2016

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals 

__________

No. 11-16-00241-CV

__________

IN THE MATTER OF L.M.B., A JUVENILE

On Appeal from the County Court at Law

Midland County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 6733

O R D E R

This is an accelerated appeal from an order in which a juvenile court waived 

its jurisdiction and transferred the cause to a criminal district court. See TEX. FAM.

CODE ANN. § 54.02 (West 2014), § 56.01(h), (h-1) (West Supp. 2016). Upon 

docketing this case, the clerk of this court noted in a letter to the parties that it did 

not appear that Appellant had filed an affidavit of indigence or remitted the $205 

filing fee. See TEX. R. APP. P. 20.1. In response to this court’s letter, Appellant’s 

counsel has filed a motion to abate this appeal. In the motion, counsel states that 

Appellant and his father “have failed and refused to contact” counsel despite 

counsel’s request that they do so. Counsel requests that we abate this appeal to 
2

permit the trial court to hold a hearing to determine whether Appellant still desires 

to appeal this matter and to also determine the issue of indigence. Counsel’s motion 

is well-taken. 

Consequently, we abate the appeal so that Appellant and his father, if indigent, 

may file in the trial court proper affidavits of indigence or statements of inability to 

afford payment of court costs.

1 See FAM. § 56.01(l) (stating that child, his parent, or 

other person responsible for support of the child may be ordered to pay the child’s 

costs of appeal, including the costs of representation by an attorney, unless the court 

determines the person to be ordered to pay the costs is indigent); see also id.

§ 56.01(m). We will reinstate the appeal upon receiving either (a) a supplemental 

clerk’s record containing (1) a proper affidavit of indigence or statement of inability 

to afford payment of court costs and (2) any order entered by the trial court or (b) the 

$205 filing fee. Should Appellant or a person responsible for Appellant’s support

fail to either file appropriate documentation of indigence or pay this court’s filing 

fee by October 5, 2016, this court may dismiss the appeal pursuant to TEX. R.

APP. P. 42.3. 

Appellant’s motion is granted, and the appeal is abated. 

PER CURIAM

September 15, 2016

Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

Willson, J., and Bailey, J. 

 

1We note that the trial court’s order reflects that Appellant’s father was duly and properly served 

with a summons and that he was present at the hearing.
§ 3171.15 Master Development Plans. ( a ) An operator may elect to submit a Master Development Plan addressing two or more APDs that share a common drilling plan, Surface Use Plan of Operations, and plans for future development and production. Submitting a Master Development Plan facilitates early planning, orderly development, and the cumulative effects analysis for all the APDs expected to be drilled by an operator in a developing field. Approval of a Master Development Plan serves as approval of all of the APDs submitted with the Plan. Processing of a Master Development Plan follows the procedures in § 3171.12(b).
( b ) After the Master Development Plan is approved, subsequent APDs can reference the Master Development Plan and be approved using the NEPA analysis for the Master Development Plan, absent substantial deviation from the Master Development Plan previously analyzed or significant new information relevant to environmental effects. Therefore, an approved Master Development Plan results in timelier processing of subsequent APDs. Each subsequent proposed well must have a survey plat and an APD (Form 3160-3) that references the Master Development Plan and any specific variations for that well.
### §849. Repealed. Pub. L. 95–281, §1(b)(3), May 15, 1978, 92 Stat. 246

Section, act Aug. 3, 1956, ch. 909, §9, 70 Stat. 965, provided for revocation of tribal corporate charter and termination of Federal powers over tribe.
Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Mem o randum Opinion filed

November 6 , 2015.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 15

- 00943

- CV

IN RE VINCENT FRANZE SKOS , Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS 246th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2004

- 68975



### MEMORANDUM OPINION

On November 5, 2015, relator Vincent Franzeskos filed a petition for writ of

m andamus in this c ourt. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 ( West 2004); see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this c ourt to compel the Honorable Charley Prine, presiding judge of the 246th District Court of Harris County , to2

vacate his denial of and grant relator’s motion for judgment n unc pro tunc of an order that modified the child possession provisions of a final divorce decree

. Relator has not satisfied his burden to demonstrate his entitlement to the extraordinary relief of a writ of mandamus. See In re State Bar of Tex ., 113 S.W.3d 730, 733 (Tex. 2003) (orig. proceeding) (“‘Mandamus issues only to correct a clear abuse of discretion or the violation of a duty imposed by law when there is no other adequate remedy by law .’ ” (quoting Walker v. Packer , 827 S.W.2d 833, 839 (Tex. 1992) (o rig. proceeding) ) (emphasis added)

. Relator may file a motion to modify the possession order. See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 156.101. Thus, he has an adequate remedy at law. See In re Hernandez , 14

- 13

- 01038

- CV, 2014 WL 6854621, at *1 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] Dec. 4, 2014, orig. proceeding)

. Additionally, the record for a petition for writ of mandamus must contain either a written order fro m the trial court or a reporter’ s record of the trial court’ s oral order denying a motion for relief. See In re Bill Heard Chevrolet, Ltd ., 209 S.W.3d 311, 316 (Tex. App.

— Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, orig. proceeding). In this

case, relator has not provided either a written order or a reporter’s record showing that the trial court denied hi s motion for judgment nunc pro tu nc . Relator has only provided an affidavit of his attorney that the trial court denied the motion. A n affidavit may not serve as a substitute for the official record. See In re Whitney , 14

- 13

- 00999

- CV, 2013 WL 6157121, at *1 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] Nov. 21, 2013, orig. proceeding) (citing Hamilton v. Empire Gas & Fuel Co ., 134 Tex. 377, 384

– 85, 110 S.W.2d 561, 566 (1937); Res. Health Servs., Inc. v. Acucare3

Health Strategies, Inc ., No. 14

– 06

– 00846

– CV, 2007 WL 4200587, at *1 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] Nov. 29, 2007, no pet.) (mem. op.). Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus because: (1) he has an adequate remedy at law, and (2) he has not provided this court with an adequate record. Relator also filed a motion for emergency stay. Because we deny the petition, we also deny the motion for emergency stay.

PER CURIAM

Panel c onsists of Justices Boyce, Busby, and Brown.
§ 3203.11 Under what circumstances may parcels be offered as a block for competitive sale? ( a ) As part of your nomination, you may request that lands be offered as a block at competitive sale by: ( 1 ) Specifying that the lands requested will be associated with a project or unit: and
( 2 ) Including information to support your request. BLM may require that you provide additional information.
( b ) BLM may offer parcels as a block in response to a request under paragraph (a) of this section or on its own initiative. BLM will offer parcels as a block only if information is available to BLM indicating that a geothermal resource that could be produced as one unit can reasonably be expected to underlie such parcels.
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4533 

To reauthorize the National Flood Insurance Program. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 14, 2022 

Mr. KENNEDY (for himself, Mrs. HYDE-SMITH, Mr. RUBIO, and Mr. CASSIDY) 

introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 

Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs 

A BILL 

To reauthorize the National Flood Insurance Program. 

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 ‘‘NFIP Extension Act 

5 of 2022’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF NATIONAL FLOOD INSUR7 ANCE PROGRAM. 

8 (a) FINANCING.—Section 1309(a) of the National 

9 Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4016(a)) is 

10 amended by striking ‘‘September 30, 2022’’ and inserting 

11 ‘‘September 30, 2023’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4533 IS

1 (b) PROGRAM EXPIRATION.—Section 1319 of the Na2 tional Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4026) is 

3 amended by striking ‘‘September 30, 2022’’ and inserting 

4 ‘‘September 30, 2023’’. 

5 (c) RETROACTIVE EFFECTIVE DATE.—If this Act is 

6 enacted after September 30, 2022, the amendments made 

7 by subsections (a) and (b) shall take effect as if enacted 

8 on September 30, 2022. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
### §53. Disbursing officers; acting clerks

Any disbursing agent of the Indian Service, with the approval of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, may authorize a clerk employed in his office to act in his place and discharge all the duties devolved upon him by law or regulations during such time as he may be unable to perform the duties of his position because of absence, physical disability, or other disqualifying circumstances: Provided, That such clerk, while acting for his principal, shall be subject to all the liabilities and penalties prescribed by law for official misconduct of disbursing agents.

(Feb. 14, 1920, ch. 75, §1, 41 Stat. 414; Pub. L. 92–310, title II, §229(f), June 6, 1972, 86 Stat. 209.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1972—Pub. L. 92–310 struck out provisions which related to official bond of disbursing agent.

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

For transfer of functions of other officers, employees, and agencies of Department of the Interior, with certain exceptions, to Secretary of the Interior, with power to delegate, see Reorg. Plan No. 3 of 1950, §§1, 2, eff. May 24, 1950, 15 F.R. 3174, 64 Stat. 1262, set out in the Appendix to Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.

Disbursement functions of all Government agencies, except Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force and the Panama Canal, transferred to Division of Disbursements, Department of the Treasury, by Ex. Ord. No. 6166, §4, June 10, 1933, and Ex. Ord. No. 6728, May 29, 1934. Division subsequently consolidated with other agencies into Fiscal Service in Department of the Treasury by Reorg. Plan No. III of 1940, §1(a)(1), eff. June 30, 1940, 5 F.R. 2107, 54 Stat. 1231. See section 306 of Title 31, Money and Finance.
### §571. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, act July 27, 1939, ch. 387, §1, 53 Stat. 1128, which directed the Secretary of the Interior to prepare a membership roll of the Shoshone Tribe, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
### §191a. Repealed. Pub. L. 86–571, §10(a), July 5, 1960, 74 Stat. 310

Section, act Oct. 29, 1941, ch. 462, 55 Stat. 756, authorized admission to Saint Elizabeths Hospital of Foreign Service personnel adjudged insane in a foreign country. See section 321 et seq. of this title.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Pub. L. 86–571, §10, July 5, 1960, 74 Stat. 310, provided that the repeal of this section and section 196a of this title is effective upon the date of enactment of legislation appropriating funds for carrying out section 321 et seq. of this title.
#### § 3179.60 Gas-well gas.

Gas-well gas may not be flared or vented, except where it is unavoidably lost pursuant to § 3179.41(b).
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 The undersigned hereby certifies, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in
his capacity as an officer of Emmis Communications Corporation (the Company),
that, to his knowledge: (1) the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year
ended February 28, 2003, 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 such report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company. Dated: May 14, 2004 /s/
    
    JEFFREY H. SMULYANJeffrey H. SmulyanChairman of the Board, President andChief Executive Officer
 9