alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 4.1109 Service. ( a ) ( 1 ) Any party initiating a proceeding in OHA under the Act shall, on the date of filing, simultaneously serve copies of the initiating documents on the officer in the Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Department of the Interior, representing OSMRE in the state in which the mining operation at issue is located, and on any other statutory parties specified under § 4.1105 of this part.
( 2 ) The jurisdictions, addresses, and telephone numbers of the applicable officers of the Office of the Solicitor to be served under paragraph (a)(1) of this section are identified in the OHA Standing Orders on Contact Information.
( 3 ) Any party or other person who subsequently files any other document with OHA in the proceeding shall simultaneously serve copies of that document on all other parties and persons participating in the proceeding.
( b ) Copies of documents by which any proceeding is initiated shall be served on all statutory parties personally or by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, or by electronic transmission under the terms of the OHA Standing Orders on Electronic Transmission. All subsequent documents shall be served personally or by first class mail or by electronic transmission under the terms of the OHA Standing Orders on Electronic Transmission.
( c ) Service of copies of all documents is complete at the time of personal service or, if service is made by mail, upon receipt, or, if service is made by electronic transmission, at the time of transmission.
( d ) Whenever an attorney has entered an appearance for a party in a proceeding before an administrative law judge or the Board, service thereafter shall be made upon the attorney.
[43 FR 34386, Aug. 3, 1978, as amended at 45 FR 50753, July 31, 1980; 52 FR 39526, Oct. 22, 1987; 56 FR 2142, Jan. 22, 1991; 56 FR 5061, Feb. 7, 1991; 59 FR 1488, Jan. 11, 1994; 59 FR 42774, Aug. 19, 1994; 60 FR 58243, Nov. 27, 1995; 61 FR 40348, Aug. 2, 1996; 67 FR 61510, Oct. 1, 2002; 75 FR 64669, Oct. 20, 2010; 88 FR 5795, Jan. 30, 2023]
### §82. Payments under contracts; aiding in making prohibited contracts

No money shall be paid to any agent or attorney by an officer of the United States under any such contract or agreement, other than the fees due him for services rendered thereunder; but the moneys due the tribe, Indian, or Indians, as the case may be, shall be paid by the United States, through its own officers or agents, to the party or parties entitled thereto; and no money or thing shall be paid to any person for services under such contract or agreement, until such person shall have first filed with the Commissioner of Indian Affairs a sworn statement, showing each particular act of service under the contract, giving date and fact in detail, and the Secretary of the Interior and Commissioner of Indian Affairs shall determine therefrom whether, in their judgment, such contract or agreement has been complied with or fulfilled; if so, the same may be paid, and, if not, it shall be paid in proportion to the services rendered under the contract.

(R.S. §2104.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

R.S. §2104 derived from act May 21, 1872, ch. 177, §3, 17 Stat. 137.

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

For transfer of functions of other officers, employees, and agencies of Department of the Interior, with certain exceptions, to Secretary of the Interior, with power to delegate, see Reorg. Plan No. 3 of 1950, §§1, 2, eff. May 24, 1950, 15 F.R. 3174, 64 Stat. 1262, set out in the Appendix to Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.
### §6050Q. Certain long-term care benefits

#### (a) Requirement of reporting

Any person who pays long-term care benefits shall make a return, according to the forms or regulations prescribed by the Secretary, setting forth—

(1) the aggregate amount of such benefits paid by such person to any individual during any calendar year,

(2) whether or not such benefits are paid in whole or in part on a per diem or other periodic basis without regard to the expenses incurred during the period to which the payments relate,

(3) the name, address, and TIN of such individual, and

(4) the name, address, and TIN of the chronically ill or terminally ill individual on account of whose condition such benefits are paid.

#### (b) Statements to be furnished to persons with respect to whom information is required

Every person required to make a return under subsection (a) shall furnish to each individual whose name is required to be set forth in such return a written statement showing—

(1) the name, address, and phone number of the information contact of the person making the payments, and

(2) the aggregate amount of long-term care benefits paid to the individual which are required to be shown on such return.

The written statement required under the preceding sentence shall be furnished to the individual on or before January 31 of the year following the calendar year for which the return under subsection (a) was required to be made.

#### (c) Long-term care benefits

For purposes of this section, the term "long-term care benefit" means—

(1) any payment under a product which is advertised, marketed, or offered as long-term care insurance, and

(2) any payment which is excludable from gross income by reason of section 101(g).

(Added Pub. L. 104–191, title III, §323(a), Aug. 21, 1996, 110 Stat. 2062; amended Pub. L. 105–34, title XVI, §1602(d)(1), Aug. 5, 1997, 111 Stat. 1094.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1997—Subsec. (b)(1). Pub. L. 105–34 inserted ", address, and phone number of the information contact" after "name".

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

#### Effective Date of 1997 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 105–34 effective as if included in the provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, Pub. L. 104–191, to which such amendment relates, see section 1602(i) of Pub. L. 105–34, set out as a note under section 26 of this title.

#### Effective Date

Pub. L. 104–191, title III, §323(d), Aug. 21, 1996, 110 Stat. 2063, provided that: "The amendments made by this section [enacting this section and amending section 6724 of this title] shall apply to benefits paid after December 31, 1996."
<Page>

                                                                   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

I, Matthew Carson, Chief Financial Officer of TouchTunes Music Corporation ("the
Company"), have reviewed the quarterly report of the Company on Form 10-Q for
the quarter ending September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), and based on the inquiries I have
made or caused to be made in the fulfillment of my responsibilities as the Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, I hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that for
the periods covered by the Report:

         (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
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/ Matthew Carson
------------------
Matthew Carson
Chief Financial Officer
November 14, 2005

THIS CERTIFICATE IS BEING MADE FOR THE EXCLUSIVE PURPOSE OF COMPLIANCE BY THE
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF THE COMPANY WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF SECTION 906, AND
SHALL NOT BE DEEMED TO BE A PART OF THE REPORT OR FILED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE.

A SIGNED ORIGINAL OF THIS WRITTEN STATEMENT REQUIRED BY SECTION 906 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.


                                       28
(September 22, 1943.)

#### Harry Feldman, Respondent, v. Keeshin Motor Express Co., Inc., et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants. Grace Zelie, as Administratrix of the Estate *926of Edward Zelie, Deceased, Respondent, v. Keeshin Motor Express Co., Inc., et al., Appellants.

All concur.
Article 3(c)(1) 

That for the quantity of Base Supply diverted in excess of the monthly quantity shown in 

Exhibit A during any month in which Term 91 is in effect, the Contractor shall be 

charged a fee equal to the sum of the storage operation and maintenance rate and the 

storage capital rate components of the Project ratesetting policy. In those months in 

which Term 91 is in effect for less than the entire month, the fee shall be computed on a 

pro rata basis. 

Article 3(c)(2) 

Any changes to the written schedule for any of the upcoming months of the Year shall be 

subject to the prior written approval of the Contracting Officer. 

Article 1(q) 

“Term 91” shall mean that standard term included in water right permits issued by the 

California State Water Resources Board (SWRCB) established by Decision 1594 and 

identified as Term 91, as may be modified or revised by the SWRCB.
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION

File Name: 15a0195n.06

No. 13-6581

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

RIGOBERTO FRANCISCO-REYES,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED 

STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR 

THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF 

TENNESSEE

BEFORE: KETHLEDGE and DONALD, Circuit Judges; McCALLA, District Judge.*

PER CURIAM. Rigoberto Francisco-Reyes appeals the district court’s judgment of 

conviction and sentence.

A jury found Francisco-Reyes guilty of illegally reentering the United States after being 

deported, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. The district court sentenced him to 21 months in 

prison. On appeal, Francisco-Reyes argues that there was insufficient evidence to support his 

conviction because there was no evidence that he knew his reentry into the United States was 

illegal. He contends that he did not understand his prior deportation proceedings because they 

were not conducted in his native language.

We review de novo a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence. United States v. 

Mathis, 738 F.3d 719, 735 (6th Cir. 2013). When reviewing such a claim, we must determine 

 

*The Honorable Jon Phipps McCalla, United States District Judge for the Western 

District of Tennessee, sitting by designation.
No. 13-6581

United States v. Francisco-Reyes

- 2 -

whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational 

trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Id.

Francisco-Reyes’s sufficiency-of-the-evidence claim fails because the prosecution was 

not required to prove that he knew his reentry into the United States was illegal. See United 

States v. Hussein, 675 F.2d 114, 116 (6th Cir. 1982) (per curiam). And, in any case, a rational 

juror could have concluded that Francisco-Reyes knew that his reentry was illegal, given the 

evidence that he had been deported five times between 1998 and 2009.

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment.
#### § 34.2 Applicability.

These regulations apply to all activities including, but not limited to, contracting for goods and services, employment, and any other benefits that flow from activities conducted under permits, rights-of-way, public land orders, and other Federal authorizations granted or issued pursuant to ANGTA, by recipients of those authorizations, their agents, contractors, and subcontractors, including labor unions or other persons.
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.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C., appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

                    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and                           ( print page 59941)                        the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.                 

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Special Emphasis Panel, Maternofetal Signaling and Lifelong Consequences.                    

*Date:*                         November 1, 2004.                    

*Time:*                         10 a.m. to 12 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 5B01, Rockville, MD 20852, (Telephone Conference Call).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Gopal M. Bhatnagar, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, National Institute of Child Health, and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, 6100 Bldg., Rm. 5B01, Rockville, MD 20852, (301) 435-6889,                         *bhatnagg@mail.nih.gov*.                     

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National Institutes of Health, HHS.) 

Dated: September 29, 2004.

LaVerne Y. Stringfield,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 04-22410 Filed 10-5-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
### PART IV—DECLARATORY JUDGMENTS

Sec.
7476.
Declaratory judgments relating to qualification of certain retirement plans.
7477.
Declaratory judgments relating to value of certain gifts.
7478.
Declaratory judgments relating to status of certain governmental obligations.
7479.
Declaratory judgments relating to eligibility of estate with respect to installment payments under section 6166.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**1997**—Pub. L. 105–34, title V, §§505(b), 506(c)(2), Aug. 5, 1997, 111 Stat. 855, 856, added items 7477 and 7479.

**1984**—Pub. L. 98–369, div. A, title I, §131(e)(2)(B), July 18, 1984, 98 Stat. 665, struck out item 7477 "Declaratory judgments relating to transfers of property from the United States".

**1978**—Pub. L. 95–600, title III, §336(c)(2), Nov. 6, 1978, 92 Stat. 2842, added item 7478.

**1976**—Pub. L. 94–455, title X, §1042(d)(2)(D), (E), Oct. 4, 1976, 90 Stat. 1639, struck out in part heading "RELATING TO QUALIFICATIONS OF CERTAIN RETIREMENT PLANS" after "DECLARATORY JUDGMENTS", inserted "relating to qualification of certain retirement plans" after "Declaratory judgments" in item 7476, and added item 7477.

**1974**—Pub. L. 93–406, title II, §1041(a), Sept. 2, 1974, 88 Stat. 949, added part heading and analysis of sections.
Exhibit
      32.1





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





In
      connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Blast Energy Services,
      Inc.
      (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, David
      M. Adams, as Co-Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Principal
      Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to and solely for the
      purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief,
      that:





(1)  The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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/
                David M. Adams*David
                M. AdamsCo-Chief
                Executive OfficerChief
                Operating OfficerPrincipal
                Executive OfficerMarch
                30, 2006
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-7976

CARLOS LAJUANE MURPHY,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT; STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior 

District Judge. (5:12-hc-02223-F)

Submitted: March 28, 2013 Decided: April 1, 2013

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Carlos LaJuane Murphy, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Carlos LaJuane Murphy seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order dismissing without prejudice his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 

(2006) petition for failing to abide by the orders of the court, 

failing to prosecute, and abandonment of claims. This court may 

exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 

(2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 

U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial 

Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The order 

Murphy seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an 

appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Murphy may be 

able to save his petition by amending it to comply with the 

district court’s order. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers 

Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993). 

Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and 

dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
### §881. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 91–401, §1, Sept. 16, 1970, 84 Stat. 838, which related to disposition of the judgment fund of the Potawatomi Indians, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh

Elizabeth M. Welch,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 June 4, 2021

t0601

Order 

Clerk

June 4, 2021

157738

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 157738

COA: 335862

Kent CC: 03-004460-FC

DEMARIOL DONTAYE BOYKIN,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 20, 2018 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered. We direct the Clerk to schedule oral 

argument on the application. MCR 7.305(H)(1). The appellant shall file a supplemental 

brief addressing: (1) whether the Court of Appeals correctly held in People v Wines, 323 

Mich App 343 (2018), rev’d in nonrelevant part 506 Mich 954 (2020), that trial courts must 

consider the distinctive attributes of youth, such as those discussed in Miller v Alabama, 567 

US 460 (2012), when sentencing a minor to a term of years pursuant to MCL 769.25a; (2) if 

Wines was correctly decided, whether sentencing judges have an obligation to explicitly set 

forth their analysis of how the defendant’s age impacted their sentencing discretion when 

proceeding under MCL 769.25a or MCL 769.25; and (3) if Wines applies to this case, 

whether the trial court complied with its requirements, and if it did not, what more the court 

was required to do. The appellant’s brief shall be filed by September 27, 2021, with no 

extensions except upon a showing of good cause. In the brief, citations to the record must 

provide the appendix page numbers as required by MCR 7.312(B)(1). The appellee shall file 

a supplemental brief within 21 days of being served with the appellant’s brief. A reply, if 

any, must be filed by the appellant within 14 days of being served with the appellee’s brief. 

The parties should not submit mere restatements of their application papers.

We further direct the Clerk to schedule the oral argument in this case for the same 

future session of the Court when it will hear oral argument in People v Tate (Docket No. 

158695).

The Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan and the Criminal Defense 

Attorneys of Michigan are invited to file briefs amicus curiae. Other persons or groups 

interested in the determination of the issues presented in this case may move the Court for 

permission to file briefs amicus curiae.