alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Ward and another *vs.*The Montclair Railway Company and others.

1. A purchaser at a receiver’s sale of a railroad, who, on the ground of the interest thereby acquired, was admitted a defendant in a suit to foreclose a first mortgage on the property of the railroad, but with the right only to appear at.the taking of the account of the amount due on the mortgage, and to be notified of the taking of the account; (a decree had been made, that the complainants were entitled to a sale of the mortgaged. *261premises, to pay the amount dne thereon;) but who, before the master’s report was made, had lost all his interest in the mortgaged premises by reason of a sale thereof under foreclosure of a second mortgage, has no interest in the suit to entitle him to have the final decree therein opened, and the execution set aside, because lie was not notified of the taking of the account.

2. Any interest such person might have by reason of liis ownership of any bonds secured by complainants’ mortgage, can be protected by proceedings to prevent injustice in the distribution by the trustees of the proceeds of sale.

On petition of William A. Guest to open the final decree and set aside the execution.

*Mr. John Linn,*for the petitioner.

*Mr. li. Wayne Parker*and *Mr. CortlandL Parker,*for the complainants.

The Chancellor.

The petitioner complains that he has been deprived of an opportunity to offer evidence before the master, and on that ground, and the ground of irregularity in making the final decree, prays that the decree may be opened, and the execution for the sale of the mortgaged premises set aside. The suit was brought to foreclose the first mortgage. The petitioner was admitted a defendant, on the ground of his interest as purchaser at the receiver’s sale. By the terms of the order he was not permitted either to plead, answer or demur, or to make any defence to the action, but had the right to appear at the taking of the account of the amount due on the complainants’ mortgage, and was to be notified of the taking of the account accordingly. By a decree, before then made, the complainants had been decreed to be entitled to the sale of the mortgaged premises, to raise and pay the amount due on their mortgage.

After the making of the order admitting him as a defendant, and before the master’s report was made, the petitioner lost all his interest in the premises, by reason of the sale *262thereof under foreclosure of the second mortgage. Consequently he had no interest as owner of the premises in the-subject of the reference, when the report was made. Nor does it appear that he had any interest in the reference iir any other way. It is true he testifies that he is *“*interested in the bonds secured by the complainants’ mortgage, but what the interest is he does not state. If he be the owner of any of the bonds, he may obtain all the protection to which he is: entitled, by appropriate proceedings to prevent any injustice' in the distribution by the trustees of the proceeds of the sale. There appear to be no merits in this application.

The petition will be dismissed.
### §757. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, act Sept. 1, 1954, ch. 1207, §17, 68 Stat. 1103, which related to proclamation declaring termination of Federal trust upon removal of Federal restrictions on the property of each tribe and its individual members, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
#### § 3510.11 If I already have a Federal lease, or the mineral rights on adjacent private lands, may I lease adjoining Federal lands that contain the same deposits without competitive bidding?

Yes. If the adjoining Federal lands are available for leasing, you may lease them noncompetitively, even if they are known to contain a deposit of the mineral you are interested in leasing. We will either issue a new lease for these lands (fringe acreage) or add the lands to your existing Federal lease (modification).
### SERVED: August 13, 2013

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, DC

IN THE MATTER OF BELT MAKERS, INC. FAA DOCKETNo. [To be assigned] (Civil Penalty Action) FDMS NO. FAA-2013-0049 

### ORDER OF DISMISSAL OnApril 3, 2013, the Federal AviationAdministration ("Complainant") filed a Complaint. Respondent BeltMakers, Inc. ("Respondent") had on April1, 2013 filed a Request for Hearing. OnAugust 12, 2013, Respondent movedto withdraw its Request for Hearing, citing settlement. 14 C.P.R. § 13.215 states: At any time before or during ahearing, an agency attorney may withdraw a complaint or party may withdraw a request for a hearing without the consent of the administrative lawjudge. If an agency attorney withdraws the complaint or a party withdraws the request for a hearing and the answer, the administrative law judge shall dismiss the proceedings under this subpartwithprejudice. WHEREFORE, the within filed Withdrawal ofRequest for Hearinghaving beenread and considered, it is ORDERED as follows:2



### 1. Respondent's Withdrawal ofRequest for Hearing is hereby granted; and 2. This proceeding be and is hereby dismissed with prejudice.

Attachment- Service List

# ft·~C'.~ Richard C. Goodwin Administrative Law Judge3

SERVICE LIST ORIGINAL & ONE COPY Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000 1 ONE COPY Michael L. Dworkin,

### Respondent's Counsel Michael L. Dworkin and Associates 465 California Street, Suite 210 SanFrancisco, CA 94104 TEL: 415-421-2500 FAX: 415-421-2560 LisaJ. Toscano, 

### Complainant's Counsel Office ofthe Regional Counsel, Western-Pacific Region Federal Aviation Administration P.O. Box 92007 Los Angeles, CA 90009-2007 TEL: 310-725-7110 FAX: 310-725-6816 The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin,AdministrativeLawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. DepartmentofTransportation 1200NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 202-366-5121 StaffAssistant FAX: 202-366-7536 FDMS No. FAA-2013-0049 (Civil Penalty Action)

1Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2WIOOO, Washington, DC 20591, Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
<PAGE>
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 Quarterly Report of First Capital Resources.Com, Inc.
(the "Company"), on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2002, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (S) 1350, as adopted pursuant to (S) 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.



/s/ Derri Davisson
-------------------------
Derri Davisson, President
### **Subchapter A—Definitions; Rate and Payment of Tax; Exemption From Tax; and Refund and Drawback of Tax**

Sec.
5701.
Rate of tax.
5702.
Definitions.
5703.
Liability for tax and method of payment.
5704.
Exemption from tax.
5705.
Credit, refund, or allowance of tax.
5706.
Drawback of tax.
[5707.
Repealed.]
5708.
Losses caused by disaster.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**1965**—Pub. L. 89–44, title V, §501(g), title VIII, §808(c)(2), June 21, 1965, 79 Stat. 150, 165, struck out item 5707 "Floor stocks refund on cigarettes" and inserted "Credit" before "refund" in item 5705.

**1958**—Pub. L. 85–859, title II, §202, Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1414, added item 5708.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7195

KHIDHR A. ABDUL-KHABIR,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director, Virginia Dept. of Corrections,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, 

District Judge. (2:14-cv-00488-AWA-TEM)

Submitted: November 19, 2015 Decided: November 24, 2015

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Khidhr A. Abdul-Khabir, Appellant Pro Se. Rosemary Virginia 

Bourne, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, 

Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Khidhr A. Abdul-Khabir seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 

denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The 

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues 

a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A)

(2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a 

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies 

relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by 

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the 

district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is 

debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 

(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). 

When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the 

prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural 

ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable 

claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. 

at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that

Abdul-Khabir has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, 

we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT**

March 31, 2006

U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission450 Fifth Street, N. W. Washington, D.C. 20549

Ladies and Gentlemen:

The certification set forth below is being submitted to the Securitiesand Exchange Commission solely for the purpose of complying with Section 1350of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code. Thiscertification is not to be deemed to be filed pursuant to the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 and does not constitute a part of the Annual Report on Form 10-K(the “Report”) accompanying this letter and is not to be incorporated byreference into any filing, whether made before or after the date hereof,regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.

I, J. William Holden, III, the Senior Vice President and ChiefFinancial Officer of Mirant Americas Generation, LLC (the “Company”), certifythat, subject to the qualifications noted below, to the best of my knowledge:

1.                the Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.                theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of Mirant Americas Generation,LLC.

| Name:    | /s/ J. WILLIAM  HOLDEN, III                    |   |
|----------|-----------------------------------------------------|--------|
| * * | *Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer* |

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906has been provided to Mirant Americas Generation, LLC and will be retained byMirant Americas Generation, LLC and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

----
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

      In connection with the form 10-K of Health Discovery Corporation formerly
Direct Wireless Communications Inc. for the Year ended December 31, 2003, I,
Robert S. Braswell IV, Chief Administrative Officer of Direct Wireless, hereby
certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that;

         such Form 10-K for the year ended, December 31, 2003, fully complies
         with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
         Exchange Act of 1934; and

         the information contained in such Form 10-QSB for the year ended,
         fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
         results of operation of Health Discovery Corporation.

/s/ Robert S. Braswell IV
----------------------------
Robert S. Braswell IV
Chief Administrative Officer
§ 3510.12 What must I do to obtain a lease modification or fringe acreage lease? ( a ) File three copies of your application with the BLM office that administers the lands. No specific application form is required.
( b ) Include a non-refundable filing fee as provided in § 3000.12, Table 1, of this chapter (the fee may be found under “Leasing of Solid Minerals Other Than Coal and Oil Shale (Part 3500)”). You must also make an advance rental payment in accordance with the rental rate for the mineral commodity you are seeking. If you want to modify an existing lease, the BLM will base the rental payment on the rate in effect for the lease being modified in accordance with § 3504.15.
( c ) Your fringe acreage lease application must: ( 1 ) Show the serial number of the lease if the lands specified in your application adjoin an existing Federal lease;
( 2 ) Contain a complete and accurate description of the lands desired;
( 3 ) Show that the mineral deposit specified in your application extends from your adjoining lease or from adjoining private lands you own or control; and
( 4 ) Include proof that you own or control the mineral deposit in the adjoining lands if they are not under a Federal lease.
( d ) Your lease modification application must: ( 1 ) Show the serial number of your Federal lease that you seek to modify;
( 2 ) Contain a complete and accurate description of the lands desired that adjoin the Federal lease you seek to modify; and
( 3 ) Show that— ( i ) The adjoining acreage to be added contains known deposits of the same mineral deposit that can be mined only as part of the mining operations on the original Federal lease; or
( ii ) As an alternative, show that— ( A ) The acreage to be added does not contain known deposits of the same mineral deposit; and
( B ) The adjoining acreage will be used for surface activities that are necessary for the recovery of the mineral deposit on the original Federal lease, and
( C ) Had the acreage been included in the original Federal lease at the time of that lease's issuance, the original Federal lease would have been reasonably compact.
[64 FR 53536, Oct. 1, 1999, as amended at 72 FR 50888, Sept. 5, 2007; 74 FR 641, Jan. 7, 2009]
Document Headings

                    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

                    The Small Business Administration publishes an interest rate called the optional “peg” rate (13 CFR 120.214) on a quarterly basis. This rate is a weighted average cost of money to the government for maturities similar to the average SBA direct loan. This rate may be used as a base rate for guaranteed fluctuating interest rate SBA loans. This rate will be 4.875 (4                    7/8                    ) percent for the October-December quarter of FY 2005.                

James E. Rivera,

Associate Administrator for Financial Assistance.

[FR Doc. 04-22097 Filed 9-30-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                            5083
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       77
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  6262
<PP&E>                                           29968
<DEPRECIATION>                                   16825
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   19701
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              487
<BONDS>                                          17925
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                        1289
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     19701
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  7975
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     3078
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  1542
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                1469
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   1886
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               1886
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    698
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      2584
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    48.45
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    48.45
        

</TABLE>
§ 3283.1 When may the unit operator modify the unit agreement? ( a ) The unit operator may propose to modify a unit agreement by submitting an application to BLM that: ( 1 ) Identifies the proposed change and the reason for the change; and
( 2 ) Certifies that all necessary unit interests have agreed to the change.
( b ) BLM will send the unit operator written notification of BLM's decision regarding the application. Proposed modifications to a unit agreement will not become effective until BLM approves them. BLM's approval may be made effective retroactively to the date the application was complete. BLM may approve a different effective date, including a date the unit operator requests and for which the unit operator provides acceptable justification.
(No. 1102

Claim denied.)

#### Charles Baxter, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed March 29, 1927.*

Governmental *function*— State *not liable for injuries sustained by its employees.*The State in conducting the Illinois State Penitentiary at Joliet exercises a governmental function and is not liable for injuries sustained by its employees while in the discharge of their duty.

Lagger & Blatt, for claimant.

Oscar E. Carlstrom, Attorney General ; Roy D. Johnson, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

Mr. Justice Leech

delivered the opinion of the court:

The claimant, Charles Baxter, has filed a claim on account of injuries which he received on September 30, 1926, when he was employed as a guard or keeper at the Illinois State Penitentiary at Joliet, on that day he being in charge of what is known as the fiber shop, in which were working a large number of convicts, when he was struck by a convict by the name *323of Stanley Morowski and three or four other convicts, with clubs and hammers and other weapons and was beaten about the head and body, including an injury to the bone and tissue of the left hand; that as a result thereof he was unable to work until on or about October 20, 1926, and underwent great pain and suffering, and claims that the use of his left hand was, as a result thereof, permanently impaired and that he received other permanent injuries.

To the declaration, the Attorney General of the State of Illinois has filed a demurrer, which is sustained, as a matter of law.

The evidence of Dr. Fletcher, attending physician, indicates that there are no permanent injuries. Claimant does not make any demand for loss of time or for doctor bills, and the presumption is that he was paid his regular salary while employed at the institution and given medical attention.

In view of these facts, it is our opinion that he is not entitled to any damages for the injuries as set forth in his petition.
Subject: FW: Petition to exempt food-related chemical substances from TSCA CDR exposure reproting 

requirments in 2016 

From: Karen Hoffman/DC/USEPA/US

To: "Estreicher, Herb" <estreicher@khlaw.com>

Date: 04/11/2012 03:20 PM

Subject: Petition to exempt food-related chemical substances from TSCA CDR exposure reproting requirments in 2016 

Mr. Herb Estreicher, J.D., Ph.D.

Keller and Heckman LLP

1001 G Street, N.W., Suite 500 West

Washington, D.C. 20001

RE: Petition for Partial Exemption from CDR Reporting Requirements

Dear Mr. Estreicher:

On December 14, 2011, EPA received your petition, pursuant to 40 CFR 711.15(b)(2)(iii), requesting a partial exemption from 

CDR reporting requirements for 1,3-Propanediol, (CAS RN: 504-63-2), Bentonite, Acid Leached, (CAS RN: 70131-50-9) and 

Palm Kernel Oils (CASRN: 8023-79-8). Your petition has been assigned docket number OPPT-2012-0221. 

Your petition is in the queue for review. I will keep you informed of any developments. If you have any questions, please 

contact me at Hoffman.karen@epa.gov or 202-564-8158

Sincerely,

Karen Hoffman

IUR Petitions Manager

Chemical Control Division

cc: Docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2012-0221

Karen Hoffman

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics

1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW

Washington, DC 20460

202-564-8158

Page 1 of 1

file://C:\Program Files (x86)\Documentum\CTS\docbases\ProDocbase\config\temp_sessions\6752366246896106... 7/17/2013
**Exhibit10.6**

** **

**COMPENSATIONPOLICY REGARDING COMPANY CARS**

 

The Company shall provide automobiles leased by it for the use ofcertain specified officers, described below, as part of theircompensation.  Each such officer shall have the right to receive a newautomobile leased by the Company, with a fair market value not to exceed$100,000, not more frequently than once every 24 months.  Upon the Company’slease of any new automobile for one of the specified officers, the automobilepreviously authorized for use of such officer shall be returned to theCompany.  During use by such officer, the car shall be insured by and forthe benefit of the Company, and the Company shall bear the cost of neededmaintenance and repair.  All other operational costs shall be borne by theofficer.  The officers to whom this policy applies shall be the ChiefExecutive Officer and the President of the Company.

 

 

Dated:  April 17,2009

 

----