alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 3252.13 How long may I collect information from my temperature gradient well?

You may collect information from your temperature gradient well for as long as your permit allows.
#### Laing *vs.*Martin and others.

A payment by a mortgagor to tlie holder of the mortgage in suit, made and received as a premium for an extension of the time for payment of the principal of the mortgage, should be credited on the mortgage as of the lime when the payment was made.

On final hearing, on pleadings and proofs.

*Mr. John U. Jackson,*for complainant.

*Jlr.*17. *Wayne Parker,*for the infant defendant.

The Chancellor.

This is a bill to foreclose a mortgage on certain real estate in Berth Amboy. The answer sets up and claims the benefit of a payment of $60, alleged to have been made in November, 1870, by the mortgagor to the complainant, then the holder of the mortgage in suit, in consideration of an agreement to extend the time for payment of the principal of the mortgage until the 1st of September, 1871.

The mortgage, by its terms, had become due on the 1st ©f September, 1870. The evidence satisfies me, that the payment was made, and that it was made and received as a premium for such extension. The amount of it should be credited on the mortgage, as of the time when the payment was made. *Nightingale*v. *Meginnis,*5 *Vroom*461; *Trusdell*v. *Jones, 8 C. E. Green*121, 554.

The 1 complainant is entitled to a decree, accordingly. There will be a reference to a master.
EXHIBIT 32





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)







In
connection with the Annual Report (the "Report") on Form 10-K of First
National Energy Corporation, a Nevada corporation (the "Registrant"), for
the year ending December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on this date, I, Peter Wanner, as Chief Financial
Officer of the Registrant, 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
Registrant.




Date:
      April 15, 2010/s/
      Peter WannerPeter
      WannerChief
      Financial Officer






This
certification accompanies each Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Registrant for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





A signed
original of this statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 has been provided to the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
Document

Exhibit 10.3

WESCO INTERNATIONAL, INC. 
2021 OMNIBUS INCENTIVE PLAN 
RESTRICTED STOCK UNIT AWARD AGREEMENT
NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS 


This Restricted Stock Unit Award Agreement (this “Award Agreement”) evidences an Award of Restricted Stock Units by WESCO International, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”) under the WESCO International, Inc. 2021 Omnibus Incentive Plan (the “Plan”).  Capitalized terms not defined in the Award Agreement have the meanings given to them in the Plan. 


						
	Grantee:	[NAME]
	Grant Date:	[DATE]
	Number of Restricted Stock Units:	[NUMBER]
	Vesting Term:	Each Restricted Stock Unit represents the right to receive a Share if the Restricted Stock Unit vests.  The Restricted Stock Units will vest in full on the first anniversary of the Grant Date, if Grantee does not experience a Termination of Service prior to such date; provided, however, that if Grantee’s Termination of Service as a member of the Company’s Board of Directors occurs as a result of the scheduled expiration of Grantee’s term as a member of the Board of Directors, then if such date is: (1) less than three calendar months from the Grant Date, 25% of the Restricted Stock Units shall vest; (2) at least three but less than six calendar months from the Grant Date, 50% of the Restricted Stock Units shall vest; (3) at least six but less than nine calendar months from the Grant Date, 75% of the Restricted Stock Units shall vest; or (4) at least nine calendar months from the Grant Date, 100% of the Restricted Stock Units shall vest.
	Accelerated Vesting:	Subject to the foregoing provisions, the Restricted Stock Units will be 100% fully vested upon the earliest of:  (1) Grantee’s death; (2) Grantee’s Disability; or (3) a Change in Control.  

	Forfeiture:	Except as set forth above, if Grantee has a Termination of Service before the first anniversary of the Grant Date, all rights of Grantee to the Restricted Stock Units that have not vested shall terminate and be forfeited.










						
	Delivery:	Vested Restricted Stock Units will be settled by delivery of Shares as soon as practicable after the earliest to occur of:  (1) the first anniversary of the Grant Date; (2) Grantee’s death; (3) Grantee’s Disability; or (4) a Change in Control.
	Other Terms:	All other terms are as set forth in the Plan, which is incorporated herein by reference.  In the event that a provision of the Award Agreement conflicts with the Plan, the terms of the Plan will control.  By accepting this Award Agreement, Grantee agrees to be subject to the terms and conditions of the Plan.
§ 3107.32 Segregation of leases committed in part. ( a ) Any lease committed after July 29, 1954, to any unit agreement, which covers lands within and lands outside the area covered by the agreement, will be segregated, as of the effective date of commitment to the unit, into separate leases; one covering the lands committed to the agreement, the other lands not committed to the agreement. For unproven areas, such segregation will occur only when the public interest requirement is satisfied pursuant to 43 CFR 3183.4(b). Upon satisfaction of the public interest requirement, the BLM will deem the segregation to have been effective as of the date of commitment of the lands to the unit.
( b ) ( 1 ) The segregated lease covering the non-unitized portion of the lands will continue in force and effect for the term of the lease or for 2 years from the date of segregation, whichever is longer.
( 2 ) If a partially committed lease is in an extended term because of production, the segregated, non-producing lease will continue in effect so long as the producing lease exists and rentals are paid, and so long thereafter as oil or gas is produced from the committed lease.
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4437 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude certain combat 

zone compensation of certain servicemembers relating to remotely piloted 

aircraft from gross income. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 21, 2022 

Ms. ROSEN (for herself and Mrs. BLACKBURN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude 

certain combat zone compensation of certain 

servicemembers relating to remotely piloted aircraft from 

gross income. 

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 ‘‘Remotely Piloted Air5 craft Crews Tax Relief Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4437 IS

1 SEC. 2. EXPANSION OF COMBAT ZONE COMPENSATION EX2 CLUSION. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 112 of the Internal Rev4 enue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the 

5 following new subsection: 

6 ‘‘(e) SPECIAL RULE RELATING TO REMOTELY PI7 LOTED AIRCRAFT.—For purposes of subsections (a)(1) 

8 and (b)(1), an individual shall be treated as having served 

9 in a combat zone if such individual— 

10 ‘‘(1) operated a remotely piloted aircraft when 

11 such aircraft was in a combat zone, or 

12 ‘‘(2) provided intelligence, targeting, or com13 mand and control that has been certified by the Sec14 retary of Defense to be in direct support of the oper15 ation of a remotely piloted aircraft when such air16 craft was in a combat zone.’’. 

17 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

18 this section shall apply with respect to compensation re19 ceived in taxable years ending after the date of the enact20 ment of this section for periods of active service after such 

21 date. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published

and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-50067

Summary Calendar

ROBERT F. NAYLOR, III,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

AMERICAN SCIENCE & ENGINEERING, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

EP-99-CV-369-DB

August 10, 2000

Before POLITZ, DAVIS, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

On April 10, 1998, Robert Naylor commenced an action against American

Science & Engineering (AS&E) asserting claims for discriminatory treatment,

hostile work environment and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of

1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq. (1994). The district court held that Naylor failed
1Naylor v. American Science & Engineering, No. 99-50257 (October 28, 1999).

2United States v. Shanbaum, 10 F.3d 305 (5th Cir. 1994).

3Thomas v. Capital Security Services, Inc., 836 F.2d 866 (5th Cir. 1988).

2

to establish a genuine issue of material fact as to any of the claims, and we

affirmed.1

On November 4, 1999, Naylor filed a second action against AS&E, asserting

claims of intentional discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and tortious

interference with his prospective employment under Texas law. The district court

found that Naylor’s claims were barred by the doctrine of res judicata and

appropriately dismissed the action. Our review of the record and the briefs

submitted by the parties persuades us of the correctness of the district court’s

dismissal.2 We find no abuse of discretion in the imposition of sanctions by the

district court under Fed. R. Civ. P. 11.3

AS&E seeks sanctions against Naylor for this appeal; Naylor moves for

sanctions against AS&E. Naylor’s motion is DENIED. AS&E’s motion for

sanctions, including attorney’sfees, is GRANTED and such inclusive sanctions are

set at $5000. Naylor is cast for all costs of this appeal.

The judgment appealed is AFFIRMED.
§ 3287.2 When may BLM grant a suspension of unit obligations? ( a ) BLM may grant a suspension of unit obligations when, despite the exercise of due care and diligence, the unit operator is prevented from complying with such obligations, in whole or in part, by: ( 1 ) Acts of God;
( 2 ) Federal, state, or municipal laws;
( 3 ) Labor strikes;
( 4 ) Unavoidable accidents;
( 5 ) Uncontrollable delays in transportation;
( 6 ) The inability to obtain necessary materials or equipment in the open market; or
( 7 ) Other circumstances that BLM determines are beyond the reasonable control of the unit operator, such as agency timeframes required to complete environmental documents.
( b ) BLM may deny the request for suspension of unit obligations when the suspension would involve a lengthy or indefinite period. For example, BLM might not approve a suspension of initial drilling obligations due to a unit operator's inability to obtain an electrical sales contract, or when poor economics affect the electrical generation market, limiting the opportunity to obtain a viable sales contract. BLM may grant a suspension of subsequent drilling obligations when it is in the public interest.
(No. 879

Claimant awarded $434.11.)

#### Philomena L. Greulich, Executrix of the Estate of F. A. H. Greulich, Deceased, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed May 1, 1925.*

Inheritance *tax*— property *not taxable. Claimant entitled to refund.*When an inheritance tax has been assessed against an estate, and the tax paid and the property of the estate is not subject to taxation, claimant is entitled to a refund of the tax paid.

Fergus L. Anderson, for claimant.

Oscar E. Carlstrom, Attorney General; S. S. DuHamel, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

Mr. Justice Phillips

delivered the opinion of the court:

The claimant files his claim for refund of inheritance taxes erroneously paid. -

It was paid on property not taxable under the laws of Illinois. The Attorney General has examined the files and the evidence and consents to an award of the amount claimed. On examination of the evidence the court hereby makes an award to claimant, Philomena L. Greulich, executor the estate of F. A. H. Greulich, deceased, in the sum of $434.11.
----

Exhibit 99.1 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14 OR 15d-14 OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACTOF 1934 
I, Thomas W. Buchanan, certify that: 
-  I have reviewed this annual report on Form 40-F of Provident  Energy Trust;  Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other  financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material  respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the  issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  The issuer's other certifying officer 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 issuer and  have: 
(a)    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure    controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that    material information relating to the issuer, including its consolidated    subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,    particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;    

(b)    Evaluated the effectiveness of the issuer's disclosure controls and    procedures and presented in this 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 report any change in the issuer's internal control over    financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual    report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially    affect, the issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and -  The issuer's other certifying officer and I have disclosed,  based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial  reporting, to the issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the issuer's  board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function): 
(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in    the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which    are reasonably likely to adversely affect the issuer'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 issuer's    internal control over financial reporting. Dated: April 26, 2004 

Dated: April 26, 2004 
      /s/ Thomas W. Buchanan                                    Thomas W.      BuchananChief Executive      Officer of Provident Energy Ltd.
§ 30.113 What will OHA do if it receives an incomplete probate file? If OHA determines that the probate file received from the agency is incomplete or lacks the certification described in 25 CFR 15.204, OHA may do any of the following: ( a ) Request the missing information from the agency;
( b ) Dismiss the case and return the probate file to the agency for further processing;
( c ) Issue a subpoena, interrogatories, or requests for production of documents as appropriate to obtain the missing information; or
( d ) Proceed with a hearing in the case.
- USGS Home
- Contact						   USGS
- Search 
USGS

- mobile menu barsUSGS Publications Warehouse
    Contact
    Explore recent 
    publications by USGS Authors
    Browse all of Pubs 
    Warehouse by Publication type and year
    FAQS
    Web 
    Service Documentation
    Other 
    Resources
    Descriptions of US Geological Survey Report Series
- USGS Publications Warehouse
- Contact
- Explore recent 
    publications by USGS Authors
- Browse all of Pubs 
    Warehouse by Publication type and year
- FAQS
- Web 
    Service Documentation
- Other 
    Resources
- Descriptions of US Geological Survey Report Series

- USGS Publications 
  Warehouse
- Explore					    
  Explore recent 
    publications by USGS Authors
    Browse all of Pubs 
    Warehouse by Publication type and year
- Explore recent 
    publications by USGS Authors
- Browse all of Pubs 
    Warehouse by Publication type and year
- Documentation					    
  FAQS
    Web 
    Service Documentation
    Other 
    Resources
    Descriptions of US Geological Survey Report Series
- FAQS
- Web 
    Service Documentation
- Other 
    Resources
- Descriptions of US Geological Survey Report Series
- Contact

### Evaporation from the 17 Western States, with a section on 
evaporation rates

#### Professional Paper 272-D

Tweet


#### Links

- Document: **Document**                                
  (pdf)
- Plate: **Plate 3**                                
  (pdf)
- Paper 
  version: **USGS Store**
- Download citation as:  RIS 
  | Dublin 
  Core

#### Abstract

#### Additional publication details

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable 
Document Format (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it 
is recommended that you download the documents to your computer and open them 
with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your browser may not display or 
print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe 
Reader, free of charge. More information about viewing, downloading, and 
printing report files can be found here.

Accessibility
				    FOIA				    Privacy				    Policies and 
Notices

U.S. Department of the Interior				    | 				    
U.S. Geological 
Survey				    				   URL: http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/pp272D 
                   				    				   Page Contact Information: Pubs 
Warehouse Contact Page				    				   Page Last Modified: November 18, 
2016 09:17:38
#### § 3161.2 Responsibility of the authorized officer.

The authorized officer is authorized and directed to approve unitization, communitization, gas storage and other contractual agreements for Federal lands; to assess compensatory royalty; to approve suspensions of operations or production, or both; to issue NTL's: to approve and monitor other operator proposals for drilling, development or production of oil and gas; to perform administrative reviews; to impose monetary assessments or penalties; to provide technical information and advice relative to oil and gas development and operations on Federal and Indian lands; to enter into cooperative agreements with States, Federal agencies and Indian tribes relative to oil and gas development and operations; to approve, inspect and regulate the operations that are subject to the regulations in this part; to require compliance with lease terms, with the regulations in this title and all other applicable regulations promulgated under the cited laws; and to require that all operations be conducted in a manner which protects other natural resources and the environmental quality, protects life and property and results in the maximum ultimate recovery of oil and gas with minimum waste and with minimum adverse effect on the ultimate recovery of other mineral resources. The authorized officer may issue written or oral orders to govern specific lease operations. Any such oral orders shall be confirmed in writing by the authorized officer within 10 working days from issuance thereof. Before approving operations on leasehold, the authorized officer shall determine that the lease is in effect, that acceptable bond coverage has been provided and that the proposed plan of operations is sound both from a technical and environmental standpoint.

[48 FR 36584, Aug. 12, 1983, as amended at 52 FR 5391, Feb. 20, 1987; 53 FR 17362, May 16, 1988]
#### Marion Goldstein et al., Respondents, v. Auswin Realty Corp., Appellant.

No opinion. Present — Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ.
|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


In
connection with the Quarterly Report of MEDTOX Scientific, Inc. (the Company)
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the Report), I, Kevin J. Wiersma, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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.
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|                          |                           
|------------------------- | --------------------------
|Dated:   October 28, 2004 | By:   /s/ Kevin J. Wiersma
|                          | Kevin J. Wiersma          
|                          | Chief Financial Officer   

|28
|--
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

DAY HIGH

 449

 445

 402

 393

 398

 401

 427

 425

 420

 418

 422

 417

 404

 386

 395

 424

 419

 423

 403

 422

 418

 421

 405

 395

 389

 418

 417

 452

 431

 426

 317

 315

 280

 292

 293

 304

 310

 315

 339

 376

 382

 375

 356

 341

 340

 332

 332

 338

 345

 349

 350

 357

 348

 348

 346

 345

 341

 339

 346

 351

 380

 367

 351

 340

 346

 353

 376

 380

 394

 400

 403

 394

 379

 364

 359

 363

 359

 367

 367

 375

 384

 383

 375

 372

 370

 372

 372

 379

 386

 388

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

APRIL 2005 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: May 12, 2005

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

VICTORIA CANAL ON THE MIDDLE RIVER
#### § 3507.15 How do I apply for a preference right lease?

No specific form is required. Submit three copies of your application within 60 days after the date your prospecting permit expires or the date BLM denies your request for a permit extension filed under § 3505.64 of this part, whichever is later.