alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
San Mateo, CA
                                                                   June 11, 1999
                                                                   $130,000

                             SECURED PROMISSORY NOTE

For  value  received,  the  undersigned,  Hypermedia  Communications,   Inc.,  a
California  corporation  ("Borrower") promises to pay MK GVD Fund ("Lender") the
principal  sum of one  hundred  and thirty  thousand  dollars  ($130,000),  with
interest  from the date hereof at a rate of ten percent  (10%) per annum,  which
amount shall be secured by all of the assets of Borrower.  Said principal  shall
be due and  payable on demand by Lender,  which  demand may be made at any time,
but in no event shall the principal be paid later than one hundred  eighty (180)
days after the date of this Note.  This Note may be prepaid at any time  without
penalty.

In the event of liquidation,  merger, sale, or winding up of the company, Lender
shall be entitled to receive,  prior and in  preference  to any other holders of
debt or equity securities,  (except as provided in item 1. below), the principal
value of this Note plus accrued interest.

The  following is a statement of the rights of the Borrower of this Note and the
conditions to which this Note is subject,  to which the Borrower and Lender,  by
the acceptance of this Note agree:

         1. Subordination - Creditor subordinates to Business Finance ("BF") any
security  interest or lien that  Creditor  may have in any property of Borrower.
All Subordinated  Debt is subordinated in right of payment to all obligations of
Borrower to BF now existing or hereafter arising.

         2.  Security  Interest  - Borrower  hereby  grants to Lender a security
interest  in all assets of  Borrower  to secure  repayment  of the  indebtedness
represented  by this Note.  Borrower  hereby  represents and agrees that it will
take all actions  contemplated above including the execution of a UCC1 financing
statement,  which for the purposes of such  execution,  Borrower hereby appoints
Lender as its attorney-in-fact to execute such UCC1 financing statement.

         3. Attorneys' Fees - If any action or proceeding  shall be commenced to
enforce  this Note or any right  arising  in  connection  with  this  Note,  the
prevailing  party in such action or proceeding shall be entitled to recover from
the other party the reasonable  attorneys' fees, costs, and expenses incurred by
such  prevailing   party  in  connection  with  such  action  or  proceeding  or
negotiation to avoid such action or proceeding.  In the event that any provision
of this Note should be deemed unlawful or unenforceable, such provision shall be
struck and the remainder  hereof shall be enforced to the fullest  extent of the
law.

         4.  Governing  Law - This Note is  issued  in and shall be  interpreted
under the laws of the State of California.

Issued this 11 day of June, 1999.

                                          Hypermedia Communications, Inc.



                                          By: __________________

                                          Title: ________________
### §996. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 87–775, §6, Oct. 9, 1962, 76 Stat. 776, which provided that payments would not be held to be "other income and resources", as that term was used in certain provisions of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

FLORIDA HOSPITAL MEDICINE SERVICES, LLC,

Appellant,

v.

QUALITY MEDICAL CONSULTANT GROUP, INC., RAGNIER STEIN, 

LAZARO CADAVIECO, BRIAN HORVATH, and MOLINA INPATIENT 

SERVICES, INC.,

Appellees.

No. 4D18-2169

[February 21, 2019]

Appeal of a non-final order from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth 

Judicial Circuit, Broward County; David A. Haimes, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

CACE 18-1690.

Beverly A. Pohl, Peter R. Goldman, Barbara Viota-Sawisch and Michael 

R. Lorigas of Nelson Mullins Broad and Cassel, Fort Lauderdale, for 

appellant.

Robert B. Miller of Robert B. Miller Law, LLC, for appellee Molina 

Inpatient Services, Inc.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GERBER, C.J., CIKLIN and CONNER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Rosario FELIX-TERRAZAS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-40137.

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided Feb. 23, 2006.

*245James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, H. Michael Sokolow, Federal Public Defender’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Rosario Felix-Terrazas (Felix) appeals his conviction and sentence for illegal reentry. He raises a constitutional challenge to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and (2) and also argues that the district court plainly erred in requiring him to submit to DNA testing as a condition of his supervised release. Felix’s appeal waiver is unenforceable because the magistrate judge advised him at his rearraignment hearing that he could appeal an illegal sentence. *See, e.g., United States v. Robinson,*187 F.3d 516, 517-18 (5th Cir.1999). We need not decide the applicability of the sentencing waiver in the plea agreement because the appellate issues are foreclosed.

Felix’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). Although Felix contends that *Almendarez-Torres*was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule *Almendarez-Torres*in light of *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that *Almendarez-Torres*remains binding. *See United States v. Garza-Lopez,*410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), *cert, denied,*— U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 298, 163 L.Ed.2d 260 (2005). Felix properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of *Almendarez-Torres*and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review.

Felix’s supervised release claim is not ripe for review and is therefore dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. *See United States v. Riascos-Cuenu,*428 F.3d 1100, 1101 (5th Cir.2005), *petition for cert, filed*(Jan. 9, 2006) (No. 05-8662).

JUDGMENT AFFIRMED; APPEAL DISMISSED IN PART.

*

 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.
118 STAT. 3890 PUBLIC LAW 108–468—DEC. 21, 2004

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 4232:

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 150 (2004):

Oct. 6, considered and passed House.

Dec. 7, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

Public Law 108–468

108th Congress

An Act

To redesignate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 4025

Feather Lakes Way in Kingwood, Texas, as the ‘‘Congressman Jack Fields Post

Office’’.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. REDESIGNATION.

The facility of the United States Postal Service located at

4025 Feather Lakes Way in Kingwood, Texas, and known as the

Kingwood Post Office, is hereby redesignated as the ‘‘Congressman

Jack Fields Post Office’’.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper,

or other record of the United States to the facility referred to

in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Congressman

Jack Fields Post Office’’.

Approved December 21, 2004.

Dec. 21, 2004

[H.R. 4232]
§ 2807.11 When must I contact BLM during operations? You must contact BLM: ( a ) At the times specified in your grant;
( b ) When your use requires a substantial deviation from the grant. You must seek an amendment to your grant under § 2807.20 and obtain the BLM's approval before you begin any activity that is a substantial deviation;
( c ) When there is a change affecting your application or grant, including, but not limited to, changes in: ( 1 ) Mailing address;
( 2 ) Partners;
( 3 ) Financial conditions; or
( 4 ) Business or corporate status;
( d ) Whenever site-specific circumstances or conditions result in the need for changes to an approved right-of-way grant or lease, POD, site plan, mitigation measures, or construction, operation, or termination procedures that are not substantial deviations in location or use authorized by a right-of-way grant or lease. Changes for authorized actions, project materials, or adopted mitigation measures within the existing, approved right-of-way area must be submitted to us for review and approval;
( e ) To identify and correct discrepancies or inconsistencies;
( f ) When you submit a certification of construction, if the terms of your grant require it. A certification of construction is a document you submit to BLM after you have finished constructing a facility, but before you begin operating it, verifying that you have constructed and tested the facility to ensure that it complies with the terms of the grant and with applicable Federal and state laws and regulations; or
( g ) When BLM requests it. You must update information or confirm that information you submitted before is accurate.
[70 FR 21058, Apr. 22, 2005, as amended at 81 FR 92222, Dec. 19, 2016]
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-23-00640-CV

IN RE Danielle ROBBINS

Original Proceeding1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Beth Watkins, Justice

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

Delivered and Filed: July 26, 2023

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED

On June 30, 2023, Relator Danielle Robbins filed a petition for writ of mandamus. After 

considering the petition and this record, this court concludes relator is not entitled to the relief 

sought. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a). 

Relator’s motion for emergency relief is denied as moot. Real party in interest DoorDash Inc.’s 

motion for joinder is denied as moot.

PER CURIAM

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2020CI21886, styled David Ybarra and Andres Hernandez Garcia v. 

Danielle Robbins and DoorDash, Inc., pending in the 225th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas. The 

Honorable Mary Lou Alvarez presided over the orders at issue.
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4707 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4707

To amend the National Trails System Act to direct the Secretary of the 
   Interior to conduct a study on the feasibility of designating the 
   Buckeye Trail as a national scenic trail, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             August 2, 2022

Mr. Portman (for himself and Mr. Brown) introduced the following bill; 
   which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the National Trails System Act to direct the Secretary of the 
   Interior to conduct a study on the feasibility of designating the 
   Buckeye Trail as a national scenic trail, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Buckeye National Scenic Trail 
Feasibility Study Act of 2022''.

SEC. 2. BUCKEYE NATIONAL SCENIC TRAIL FEASIBILITY STUDY.

    Section 5(c) of the National Trails System Act (16 U.S.C. 1244(c)) 
is amended by adding at the end the following:
            ``(48) Buckeye trail.--The Buckeye Trail, a system of 
        trails creating a loop extending approximately 1,454 miles from 
        Lake Erie to the Ohio River, through the farmland of northwest 
        Ohio, the hills of Appalachia, the Black Hand sandstone cliffs 
        of the Hocking Hills region, and the Bluegrass region of 
        southwest Ohio.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### § 3836.10 Performing assessment work.
- Skip to Primary Navigation
    - Skip to Main Content
    - Skip to Footer

        -   
        -   
        -   
        -   
        -   
        -   
        -   

      -  Water & Power          - Dams
        - Powerplants
        - Projects
        - Agrimet/Hydromet
        - Water Operations 
      -  Resources & Research          - Programs
        - Technical Service Center
        - Research & Development
        - Reclamation Manual
        - Environmental Resources/Reports
        - Library 
      -  About Us          - Mission
        - Fact Sheet
        - Commissioner
        - Addresses/Contacts
        - Organizational Chart
        - Leadership Bios
        - Employment
        - Contact 
      -  Recreation & Public Use          - Find Recreation
        - Recreation.gov
        - Public Use 
      -  News & Multimedia          - News Releases
        - News Stories
        - Speeches
        - Congressional Testimony
        - Fact Sheets
        - Photos
        - Multimedia
        - Social Media 

# California-Great Basin

Welcome to the Bureau of Reclamation California-Great Basin

            - Reclamation
            - California-Great Basin
            - CVP
            - Ratesetting
            - CVP Annual Ratebooks & Schedules
            - CVP Ratebooks - Irrigation, 2008

Region 10              - Region 10 Home
              - About Us
              - Area Offices
              - Central Valley Project (CVP)                  - About the CVP
                - Water Info Links
                - Ratesetting
                - Projects/Activities
                - Consultation on the Coordinated Long-Term Operation                         of the CVP and SWP
                - Laws/Regs/Links
                - Financial Information 
                - Long-Term Water Transfer Program
                - Central Valley Project Improvement Act (CVPIA) 
              - Programs & Activities
              - Projects & Facilities
              - Doing Business with Reclamation
              - Public Affairs
              - Employment
              - Recreation
              - Site Index
              - Contact Us

## CVP Ratebooks - Irrigation, 2008

*Note:  Documents in Portable Document Format (PDF) require Adobe Acrobat Reader 5.0 or higher to view, download Adobe Acrobat Reader*
*Last Updated: 7/15/20*

## More Information about the Bureau of Reclamation

## Stay in Touch

            -   
            -   
            -   
            -   
            -   
            -   
            -   

            - Contact Us
            - Site Index
            - Accessibility
            - Disclaimer
            - DOI
            - FOIA
            - No Fear Act
            - Notices
            - Privacy Policy
            - Quality of Information
            - Recreation.gov
            - USA.gov
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsStatistical Short-Range Guidance for Peak Wind Speed Forecasts on Kennedy Space Center/Cape Canaveral Air Force Station: Phase I ResultsThis report describes the results of the ANU's (Applied Meteorology Unit) Short-Range Statistical Forecasting task for peak winds. The peak wind speeds are an important forecast element for the Space Shuttle and Expendable Launch Vehicle programs. The Keith Weather Squadron and the Spaceflight Meteorology Group indicate that peak winds are challenging to forecast. The Applied Meteorology Unit was tasked to develop tools that aid in short-range forecasts of peak winds at tower sites of operational interest. A 7 year record of wind tower data was used in the analysis. Hourly and directional climatologies by tower and month were developed to determine the seasonal behavior of the average and peak winds. In all climatologies, the average and peak wind speeds were highly variable in time. This indicated that the development of a peak wind forecasting tool would be difficult. Probability density functions (PDF) of peak wind speed were calculated to determine the distribution of peak speed with average speed. These provide forecasters with a means of determining the probability of meeting or exceeding a certain peak wind given an observed or forecast average speed. The climatologies and PDFs provide tools with which to make peak wind forecasts that are critical to safe operations.Document ID20020090715Acquisition SourceKennedy Space CenterDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsLambert, Winifred C.*(ENSCO, Inc. Cocoa Beach, FL United States)*Merceret, Francis J.Date AcquiredSeptember 7, 2013Publication DateOctober 1, 2002Subject CategoryMeteorology And ClimatologyReport/Patent NumberRept-02-002NASA/CR-2002-211180NAS 1.26:211180Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS10-01052Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType20020090715.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
Holland & Knight 

800 17th Street, NW, Suite 1100 | Washington, DC 20006 | T 202.955.3000 | F 202.955.5564 

Holland & Knight LLP | www.hklaw.com 

Anita M. Mosner 

(202)419-2604 

anita.mosner@hklaw.com 

October 18, 2012 

Submitted via regulations.gov 

Ms. Renee V. Wright 

Program Manager, Docket Operations 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE, Room W12-140 

Washington, DC 20590 

Re: Withdrawal as U.S. Agent: Docket DOT-OST-2002-12556 

Dear Ms. Wright: 

I am writing to inform you that I am withdrawing my designation as U.S. Agent for Air Nigeria. 

We understand that the company has ceased flight operations. To the extent that the 

Department needs to contact the company, it can be reached at the following address: 

Etiebets Place, 7th Floor 

21 Mobolaji Bank Anthony Way 

Ikeja, Lagos 

Sincerely yours, 

HOLLy^lD & KNIGHT LLP 

Anita M. Mosner 

#11733037 vl 

Atlanta | Boston | Chicago | Fort Lauderdale | Jacksonville | Lakeland | Los Angeles | Miami | New York | Northern Virginia 

Orlando | Portland | San Francisco | Tallahassee | Tampa | Washington, D.C | West Palm Beach 

Abu Dhabi | Beijing | Mexico City
Served: November 26, 2013

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation

on the 26th of November, 2013

Essential Air Service at

DEVILS LAKE, NORTH DAKOTA

JAMESTOWN, NORTH DAKOTA

Under 49 U.S.C. 41731 et seq. 

DOCKET DOT-OST-1997-2785

NOTICE EXTENDING THE DEADLINE FOR PROPOSALS AT DEVILS LAKE 

AND JAMESTOWN, NORTH DAKOTA

By Order 2013-10-14, October 28, 2013, the Department requested proposals for Essential Air 

Service at Devils Lake and Jamestown, North Dakota, with proposals due no later than 

November 26, 2013. A carrier has requested a one-week extension to that deadline. 

We will grant the extension request. Proposals at Devils Lake and Jamestown are now due 

on December 4, 2013.

Kevin D. Schlemmer, Chief

EAS and Domestic Analysis

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide Web at

http://www.regulations.gov
### §2611. Generation-skipping transfer defined

#### (a) In general

For purposes of this chapter, the term "generation-skipping transfer" means—

(1) a taxable distribution,

(2) a taxable termination, and

(3) a direct skip.

#### (b) Certain transfers excluded

The term "generation-skipping transfer" does not include—

(1) any transfer which, if made inter vivos by an individual, would not be treated as a taxable gift by reason of section 2503(e) (relating to exclusion of certain transfers for educational or medical expenses), and

(2) any transfer to the extent—

(A) the property transferred was subject to a prior tax imposed under this chapter,

(B) the transferee in the prior transfer was assigned to the same generation as (or a lower generation than) the generation assignment of the transferee in this transfer, and

(C) such transfers do not have the effect of avoiding tax under this chapter with respect to any transfer.

(Added Pub. L. 94–455, title XX, §2006(a), Oct. 4, 1976, 90 Stat. 1882; amended Pub. L. 99–514, title XIV, §1431(a), Oct. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 2718; Pub. L. 100–647, title I, §§1014(g)(1), (2), 1018(u)(43), Nov. 10, 1988, 102 Stat. 3562, 3592.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1988—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 100–647, §§1014(g)(1), 1018(u)(43), substituted "generation-skipping transfer" for "generation-skipping transfers" and "means" for "mean".

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 100–647, §1014(g)(2), redesignated pars. (2) and (3) as (1) and (2), respectively, and struck out former par. (1) which read as follows: "any transfer (other than a direct skip) from a trust, to the extent such transfer is subject to a tax imposed by chapter 11 or 12 with respect to a person in the 1st generation below that of the grantor, and".

1986—Pub. L. 99–514 amended section generally, substituting provisions defining "generation-skipping transfers" and what that term does not include, for former provisions which defined "generation-skipping transfer", "transfer", and "generation-skipping trust", contained provisions to be used in determining the ascertainment of generation, and provided for a generation-skipping trust equivalent.

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

#### Effective Date of 1988 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 100–647 effective, except as otherwise provided, as if included in the provision of the Tax Reform Act of 1986, Pub. L. 99–514, to which such amendment relates, see section 1019(a) of Pub. L. 100–647, set out as a note under section 1 of this title.

#### Effective Date of 1986 Amendment

Section applicable to generation-skipping transfers (within the meaning of section 2611 of this title) made after Oct. 22, 1986, except as otherwise provided, see section 1433 of Pub. L. 99–514, set out as a note under section 2601 of this title.
#### Maxwell M. Wallach, Appellant, v. Meyer Paley et al., Respondents.

Order dismissing amended complaint on the ground it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Present — Lewis, P. J., Carswell, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ.