alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 3281.19 What action will BLM take on a proposed unit agreement? BLM will: ( a ) Review the proposed unit agreement to ensure that the public interest is protected and that the agreement conforms to applicable laws and regulations;
( b ) Coordinate the review of a proposed unit agreement with appropriate state agencies, and other Federal surface management agencies, if applicable;
( c ) Approve the unit agreement and provide the unit operator with signed copies of the agreement, if we determine: ( 1 ) That the unit operator has submitted all required information;
( 2 ) That the unit agreement and the unit operator satisfy all required terms and conditions, including the requirements specified at §§ 3281.14 and 3281.15, and conform with all applicable laws and regulations; and
( 3 ) That the unit agreement is necessary or advisable to meet the public interest;
( d ) Notify the unit operator in writing if we reject the unit agreement proposal; and
( e ) Reject any unit application that includes lands already committed to an approved unit agreement.
### §564c. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, act Aug. 13, 1954, ch. 732, §4, 68 Stat. 718; Pub. L. 85–731, §2, Aug. 23, 1958, 72 Stat. 818, which related to personal property rights, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1 

79–011 2017

115th Congress, 1st Session – – – – – – – – – – – – – House Document 115–74 

DESIGNATION OF FUNDING AS AN EMERGENCY 

REQUIREMENT 

COMMUNICATION 

FROM

THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES 

TRANSMITTING

DESIGNATION OF FUNDING AS AN EMERGENCY REQUIREMENT, 

PURSUANT TO THE ADDITIONAL SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR DISASTER RELIEF REQUIREMENTS ACT, 2017, SEC. 

304 

OCTOBER 27, 2017.—Referred to the Committee on Appropriations and 

ordered to be printed 


E:\Seals\Congress.#13
(1) 

THE WHITE HOUSE, 

Washington, October 26, 2017. 

Hon. PAUL D. RYAN, 

Speaker of the House of Representatives, 

Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. SPEAKER: In accordance with section 304 of division A 

of the Additional Supplemental Appropriations for Disaster Relief 

Requirements Act, 2017 (H.R. 2266; the ‘‘Act’’), I hereby designate 

as emergency requirements all funding (including the repurposing 

of funds and cancellation of debt) so designated by the Congress in 

the Act pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A) of the Balanced Budget 

and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, as outlined in the enclosed list of accounts. 

The details of this action are set forth in the enclosed memorandum from the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. 

Sincerely, 

DONALD J. TRUMP. 

2 


Insert offset folio 3 HD74.001
3 


Insert offset folio 4 HD74.002
4 


Insert offset folio 5 HD74.003
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CORALIA DEL CARMEN CORNEJO,

Petitioner,

 v.

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,

Respondent.

No. 19-72929

Agency No. A216-166-778

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Argued and Submitted October 26, 2020

Portland, Oregon

Before: GRABER, CLIFTON, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

Coralia Del Carmen Cornejo petitions for review of the Board of

Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision affirming the immigration judge’s (“IJ”)

denial of asylum and withholding of removal. We deny the petition. 

Substantial evidence supports at least one basis for the IJ’s adverse

credibility determination. See Lizhi Qiu v. Barr, 944 F.3d 837, 842 (9th Cir. 2019)

FILED

NOV 3 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
(holding that we must uphold an adverse credibility finding if substantial evidence

supports even one ground relied upon). Cornejo’s testimony was inconsistent with

declarations submitted by her mother and brother. See Kohli v. Gonzales, 473 F.3d

1061, 1071 (9th Cir. 2007) (concluding that discrepancies between petitioner’s

testimony, declaration, and letter of membership substantially supported an adverse

credibility finding). The inconsistency is not trivial: whether and when Cornejo

and her mother fled their home relates directly to the threats by gang members.

See Chebchoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1043 (9th Cir. 2001) (holding that

inconsistencies relating to “the events leading up to [petitioner’s] departure and the

number of times he was arrested” substantiated an adverse credibility

determination), superseded by statute on other grounds as stated in Shrestha v.

Holder, 590 F.3d 1034, 1046 (9th Cir. 2010). Absent credible testimony,

Cornejo’s asylum and withholding claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d

1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003). We need not reach Cornejo’s other arguments. 

PETITION DENIED.

2
#### The First National Bank of Paterson *vs.*Byard and others.

A mortgage given to a bank to secure payment of 810,000 in six months, contained a proviso as follows: “ This mortgage being given to secure whatever amount of indebtedness may at any time hereafter exist from the said John Byard to The First National Bank of Paterson,” &c. *Held,*
      *256that the mortgage was not restricted by the proviso to the indebtedness o the. mortgagor to the bank, arising from direct dealings between them, but was security also for the amount of notes made by the mortgagor to the order of a third person, and by him endorsed to the bank and discounted for him.

Bill for foreclosure and sale of mortgaged premises. On •exceptions to master’s report.

*Mr. I. Van Wagoner,*for the exceptant.

*Mr. H. A. Williams,*for complainants.

The Chancellor.

The exceptant is the holder of a mortgage subsequent to •that of the complainants. Both mortgages were given by John Byard, and. are on the same property. The master has reported that there is due on the complainants’ mortgage the sum of $4655.48, almost all of which is due on notes made by Byard to the order *of*one McNab, by whom they were endorsed to the complainants, who discounted them for him. The only question raised on the argument was, whether the indebtedness of Byard to the complainants, on those notes, is covered by the complainants’ mortgage. The proviso of that instrument, after stating that the mortgage was given to secure to the complainants the payment of $10,000 in six months from its date, with interest, according to the condition of Byard’s bond to them, adds: This mortgage being given to secure whatever amount of indebtedness may at any time hereafter exist from the said John Byard to The Eirst National Bank of Paterson, and whenever the same shall be paid without any deduction or defalcation for taxes, assessments, or any other impositions whatsoever, then and from thenceforth these presents and said obligation, and everything herein and therein contained shall cease and be void.” The proviso does not confine the indebtedness to such as may be contracted or arise in. any particular way or at any particular *257time, but expressly declares it to be the intention of the parties to the mortgage, to secure *whatever indebtedness*may *at any time thereafter exist*from Byard to the complainants. I see no ground for the proposition, Rat the object of the mortgage was to secure only such indebtedness of Byard to the bank as might arise from direct dealings between them.

The exceptions will be overruled, with costs.
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

 508.71

 508.75

 508.87

 508.58

 508.77

 508.78

 507.89

 508.25

 508.63

 508.78

 509.06

 508.97

 508.75

 507.73

 507.58

 507.32

 507.19

 507.20

 507.75

 507.90

 507.43

 507.88

 507.95

 508.06

 507.15

 506.67

 506.70

 505.86

 505.77

 505.71

 65,363

 65,412

 65,560

 65,203

 65,437

 65,449

 64,356

 64,797

 65,265

 65,449

 65,795

 65,683

 65,412

 64,162

 63,980

 63,665

 63,507

 63,519

 64,186

 64,368

 63,798

 64,344

 64,428

 64,563

 63,459

 62,883

 62,919

 61,918

 61,813

 61,742

STORAGE

+862

+49

+148

-357

+234

+12

-1,093

+441

+468

+184

+346

-112

-271

-1,250

-182

-315

-158

+12

+667

+182

-570

+546

+84

+135

-1,104

-576

+36

-1,001

-105

-71

CHANGE

1,859

1,450

1,376

995

1,259

1,156

519

1,224

1,236

1,098

1,194

951

932

457

1,029

917

897

871

1,140

901

540

1,193

1,030

1,028

369

401

556

11

405

413

INFLOW

 1,409

 1,407

 1,285

 1,159

 1,125

 1,136

 1,056

 987

 986

 991

 1,005

 993

 1,054

 1,069

 1,106

 1,060

 965

 852

 793

 798

 809

 907

 979

 949

 913

 688

 526

 511

 419

 442

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

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

 34

 0

OUTLET

 15

 18

 16

 16

 16

 14

 14

 15

 14

 14

 15

 14

 15

 18

 15

 16

 12

 13

 11

 11

 18

 11

 9

 11

 13

 3

 12

 5

 5

 7

C.F.S.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

SEPTEMBER 2014 TULLOCH RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: 10/01/2014

RES.

EVAP

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S. 

TOTALS -2,759 27,407 28,379 0 34 386

ACRE-FEET -2,759 54,362 56,290 0 67 766

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 56,290

SPILL 0 56,357

 64,501

OUTLET 67

TOTAL 

NEW

MELONES

RELEASE (1)

 1,842

 1,396

 1,375

 994

 1,270

 1,146

 530

 1,219

 1,218

 1,102

 1,189

 948

 933

 474

 1,027

 920

 903

 853

 1,089

 853

 480

 1,133

 977

 988

 375

 418

 545

 35

 413

 413

 27,058

 53,670

*COMPUTED INFLOW IS SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES, AND EVAPORATION.
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION



In connection with the periodic report of American Pharmaceutical Partners, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Patrick Soon-Shiong, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United
States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods
indicated.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



This Certification has not been, and shall not be
deemed, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company, and will be retained by the Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



|                      |  |  |  |  |  |                            |  |                                            
|--------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | -------------------------- |  | -------------------------------------------
|                      |  |  | 
|Date:  March 15, 2004 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/    PATRICK SOON-SHIONG
|                      |  |  |  |  |  |                            | 
|                      |  |  |  |  |  |                            |  | Patrick Soon-Shiong Chief Executive
Officer
#### In the Matter of Edith Gooden, an Infant, by Louis Gooden, Her Guardian ad Litem, Appellant, against Board of Education of Marcellus Central School District, Respondent.

Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. All concur. (The order denies petitioner’s motion for leave to serve a notice of claim against the board of education.) Present — Taylor, P. J, MeCurn, Love, Vaughan and Kimhall, JJ.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsSiC-Based Gas Sensor DevelopmentSilicon carbide based Schottky diode gas sensors are being developed for applications such as emission measurements and leak detection. The effects of the geometry of the tin oxide film in a Pd/SnO2/SiC structure will be discussed as well as improvements in packaging SiC-based sensors. It is concluded that there is considerable versatility in the formation of SiC-based Schottky diode gas sensing structures which will potentially allow the fabrication of a SiC-based gas sensor array for a variety of gases and temperatures.Document ID20000021223Acquisition SourceGlenn Research CenterDocument TypePreprint (Draft being sent to journal)AuthorsHunter, G. W.*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Neudeck, P. G.*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Gray, M.*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Androjna, D.*(Cortez 3 Service Corp. Cleveland, OH United States)*Chen, L.-Y.*(AYT Corp. Brook Park, OH United States)*Hoffman, R. W., Jr.*(Ohio Aerospace Inst. Brook Park, OH United States)*Liu, C. C.*(Case Western Reserve Univ. Cleveland, OH United States)*Wu, Q. H.*(Case Western Reserve Univ. Cleveland, OH United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 7, 2013Publication DateJanuary 1, 2000Subject CategoryInstrumentation And PhotographyReport/Patent NumberE-12009NAS 1.15:209653NASA/TM-2000-209653Meeting InformationMeeting: Silicon Carbide and Related MaterialsLocation: Raleigh, NCCountry: United StatesStart Date: October 10, 1999End Date: October 15, 1999Sponsors:North Carolina State Univ.Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 242-82-62Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType20000021223.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 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 HIGH

 503

 512

 498

 592

 577

 567

 563

 541

 509

 487

 521

 533

 500

 534

 600

 591

 538

 561

 554

 566

 578

 575

 539

 561

 621

 588

 587

 597

 635

 628

 562

 458

 485

 471

 460

 500

 516

 518

 430

 445

 451

 467

 460

 457

 468

 490

 483

 501

 480

 507

 514

 504

 507

 476

 448

 560

 543

 524

 551

 527

 567

 488

 478

 498

 480

 517

 528

 544

 539

 467

 478

 466

 498

 496

 487

 507

 553

 532

 524

 533

 529

 548

 536

 540

 513

 522

 585

 558

 572

 575

 585

 590

 520

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

AUGUST 2009 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: September 2, 2009

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

30 DAY

ACCUM

MEAN

30 DAY

AVG 

MEAN

 16,102

 16,078

 16,066

 16,068

 16,086

 16,105

 16,107

 16,007

 15,916

 15,740

 15,630

 15,478

 15,283

 15,130

 15,008

 14,897

 14,843

 14,832

 14,810

 14,806

 14,813

 14,934

 15,017

 15,100

 15,236

 15,348

 15,426

 15,531

 15,689

 15,778

 15,820

 537

 536

 536

 536

 536

 537

 537

 534

 531

 525

 521

 516

 509

 504

 500

 497

 495

 494

 494

 494

 494

 498

 501

 503

 508

 512

 514

 518

 523

 526

 527

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

30 DAY ACCUM MEAN and 30 DAY AVG MEAN columns are 30 day runnings, except for April 1 and September 1, 

 where they do not go back 30 days.

VERNALIS ON THE SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
#### § 3255.10 Will BLM disclose information I submit under these regulations?

All Federal and Indian data and information submitted to the BLM are subject to part 2 of this title. Part 2 includes the regulations of the Department of the Interior covering public disclosure of data and information contained in Department records. Certain mineral information not protected from disclosure under part 2 may be made available for inspection without a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.
#### § 3163.3 Criminal penalties.

Any person who commits an act for which a civil penalty is provided in § 3163.2(f) shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $50,000, or by imprisonment for not more than 2 years, or both.

[70 FR 75954, Dec. 22, 2005]
#### § 2610.0-7 Background.

The Carey Act authorizes the Secretary of the Interior, with the approval of the President, to contract and agree to grant and patent to States, in which there are desert lands, not exceeding 1 million acres of such lands to each State, as the State may cause to be reclaimed. The State shall also cause not less than 20 acres of each 160 acre tract to be cultivated by actual settlers. A number of amendments allowed additional acreages for certain States. Colorado, Nevada and Wyoming were allowed up to 2 million acres. Idaho was allowed up to 3 million acres.
## In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07 - 15 - 00249 - CR RUDY CORTINAS, APPEL LANT

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE On Appeal from the 432nd District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 1345818D, Honorable Ruben Gonzalez, Jr., Presiding



### July 23 , 2015 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before QUINN, C.J., and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ. Appellant Rudy Cortinas appeals his conviction for possessing a controlled substance. He filed his notice of appeal pro se and now seeks the appointment of appellate counsel. Accordingly, we abate this appeal and remand the cause to the trial court for further proceedings. Upo n remand, the trial court shall immediately determine, via a reasonable means selected by the trial court, whether Appellant is entitled to the appointment of counsel per Texas Code of Criminal Procedure art. 26.04. The trial2

court is also directed to ent er such orders necessary to address the aforementioned question and to order the appointment of counsel if appellant is found entitled to same. So too shall it include its findings on this matter (including the name, address, and phone number of any attor ney it may appoint to represent Appellant in this appeal) in a supplemental record and cause that record to be filed with the clerk of this Court by August 24, 2015. Should further time be needed to perform these tasks, then same must be requested before that date. Per Curia m Do not publish.
#### Brooklyn Trust Company, as Trustee under a Declaration of Trust Dated the 29th Day of August, 1938, for the Benefit of Certificate Holders of Guarantee Number 181,325 of Bond and Mortgage Guarantee Company, Respondent, v. Ess Ess Realty Company et al., Defendants, and Laurens R. Bowden, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant Bowden from an order fixing a deficiency judgment in an action for the foreclosure of a mortgage, and from the judgment entered pursuant thereto. Order and judgment reversed on the law and the facts, with $10 costs and disbursements, and the proceeding remitted to Special Term for a rehearing. The valuations fixed by the plaintiff’s witness, which were adopted *in toto*by the official referee, erroneously disregarded pertinent factors — the assessed valuations fixed by the village and the town *(Matter of Gedarhurst Gardens, Ina.,*v. *Eldred,*266 App. Div. 1016), the undisputed Jordan sale, the value of the trees, shrubbery and landscaping, and the true character and extent of the heating and bathroom facilities. The proof in respect of the equalization tables was improperly excluded. Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Sneed, JJ., concur; Hagarty, Acting P. J., not voting.
IIB 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4618 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 19, 2016 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 

Public Works 

AN ACT 

To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located at 121 Spring Street SE in Gainesville, 

Georgia, as the ‘‘Sidney Oslin Smith, Jr. Federal Building and United States Courthouse’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


sradovich on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 4618 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. SIDNEY OSLIN SMITH, JR. FEDERAL BUILDING 

2 AND UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE. 

3 (a) DESIGNATION.—The Federal building and United 

4 States courthouse located at 121 Spring Street SE in 

5 Gainesville, Georgia, shall be known and designated as the 

6 ‘‘Sidney Oslin Smith, Jr. Federal Building and United 

7 States Courthouse’’. 

8 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg9 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

10 States to the Federal building and United States court11 house referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be 

12 a reference to the ‘‘Sidney Oslin Smith, Jr. Federal Build13 ing and United States Courthouse’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives April 18, 2016. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


sradovich on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with BILLS