alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 3862.2-3 Trustee to disclose nature of trust.

Any party applying for patent as trustee must disclose fully the nature of the trust and the name of the cestui que trust; and such trustee, as well as the beneficiaries, must furnish satisfactory proof of citizenship; and the names of beneficiaries, as well as that of the trustee, must be inserted in the final certificate of entry.
### §65. Discontinuance of agents, subagents, and interpreters

The Secretary of the Interior shall, under the direction of the President, cause to be discontinued the services of such agents, subagents, interpreters, and mechanics as may from time to time become unnecessary, in consequence of the emigration of the Indians, or other causes.

(R.S. §2073; Feb. 27, 1877, ch. 69, §1, 19 Stat. 244.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

R.S. §2073 derived from act July 9, 1832, ch. 174, §5, 4 Stat. 564.

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

#### Indian Agents

The services of Indian agents have been dispensed with. See note set out under section 64 of this title.

#### **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.
Acergy [GRAPHIC OMITTED]



NEWS RELEASE


                    Acergy S.A. Share Buyback - March 3, 2008

London, England - March 3, 2008 - Acergy S.A. (NASDAQ NM: ACGY; Oslo Stock
Exchange: ACY) advises that it has today purchased an additional 255,000 of its
common shares at an average price of NOK 112.24 per share. The shares were
purchased in accordance with its share repurchase programme previously announced
on September 11, 2006.

The shares have been acquired on the Oslo Stock Exchange and were purchased in
the market according to the authority granted by the Board.

As of today's date Acergy has reissued 3,054,243 treasury shares. As a result of
this transaction and delivering treasury shares to satisfy options exercises,
Acergy S.A. holds directly 6,550,732 of its own shares, representing 3.36% of
the total outstanding shares, as well as indirectly holding 879,121 shares
representing 0.45% of the total outstanding shares.

********************************************************************************

Acergy S.A. is a seabed-to-surface engineering and construction contractor for
the offshore oil and gas industry worldwide. We plan, design and deliver
complex, integrated projects in harsh and challenging environments. We operate
internationally as one group - globally aware and locally sensitive, sharing our
expertise and experience to create innovative solutions. We are more than
solution providers, we are solution partners - ready to make long-term
investments in our people, assets, know-how and relationships in support of our
clients.

********************************************************************************

Contacts:
Karen Menzel
Acergy S.A.
+44 (0)20 7290 1744
karen.menzel@acergy-group.com

www.acergy-group.com

If you no longer wish to receive our press releases please contact:
kelly.good@acergy-group.com
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS 

Appeal of -- ) 

) 

John Shaw LLC d/b/a Shaw Building Maintenance ) ASBCA No. 61379 

) 

Under Contract No. AAFES REZ-09-002-10-026 ) 

APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT: Mr. John Shaw, Jr. 

Owner 

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Raymond M. Saunders, Esq. 

Army Chief Trial Attorney 

CPT John M. McAdams III, JA 

Trial Attorney 

OPINION BY ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE MCILMAIL 

ON APPELLANT'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 

Appellant requests reconsideration of our recent decision dismissing its claims 

for punitive damages and for $1,882,002.00 in "missed opportunities" from contracts 

that appellant allegedly did not obtain from third parties, allegedly because of the 

government's administration of its contract with appellant. John Shaw LLC d/b/a Shaw 

Building Maintenance, ASBCA No. 61379, 2018 WL 1426992 (Mar. 8, 2018). We 

have not requested a response from the government. See RECO Rishad Engineering 

Construction ORG, ASBCA No. 60444, 17-1BCA136,767 at 179,167. 

A motion for reconsideration is not intended to allow a party to re-argue issues 

that were previously raised and decided. Precision Standard, Inc., ASBCA No. 59116, 

15-1BCA136,155 at 176,448. The moving party must show a compelling reason why 

the Board should modify its decision based upon newly discovered evidence, mistakes 

in our findings of fact, or errors of law. Id. Appellant enumerates a dozen reasons for 

its request, ranging from a pending motion to amend its complaint to "[ e ]qual justice" 

(app. mot. at 1). Having considered those reasons, we see nothing that persuades us to 

reconsider our dismissal of its punitive and "missed opportunities" claims. The motion 

for reconsideration is denied. 

Dated: 3 April 2018 

(Signatures continued) 

-------~ --:7. ' /7 p I /~~" 

rtMOTHY. MCILMXIL 

Administrative Judge 

Armed Services Board 

of Contract Appeals 
I concur 

RICHARD SHACKLEFORD 

Administrative Judge 

Acting Chairman 

Armed Services Board 

of Contract Appeals 

I concur 

Administrative Judge 

Vice Chairman 

Armed Services Board 

of Contract Appeals 

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Opinion and Decision of the Armed 

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 61379, Appeal of John Shaw LLC 

d/b/a Shaw Building Maintenance, rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. 

Dated: 

2 

JEFFREY D. GARDIN 

Recorder, Armed Services 

Board of Contract Appeals
§ 3436.2-1 Qualified exchange proponents. ( a ) Fee coal exchanges under this program shall only be available to persons who: ( 1 ) Own coal west of the 100th Meridan, west longitude, underlying or near an alluvial valley floor where surface coal mining operations are prohibited by section 510(b)(5) of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act because such operations would interrupt farming or materially damage the quantity and quality of the water in surface or underground water systems that would supply the alluvial valley floor; and
( 2 ) Are not entitled to continue any existing surface coal mining operation pursuant to the first proviso to section 510(b)(5) of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act.
( b ) Exchange proponents bear the burden of establishing their qualifications pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section. The Secretary shall accept a determination made pursuant to 30 CFR 785.19(c) as conclusive evidence of the existence of an alluvial valley floor.
### **CHAPTER 95—PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN FUND**

Sec.
9001.
Short title.
9002.
Definitions.
9003.
Condition for eligibility for payments.
9004.
Entitlement of eligible candidates to payments.
9005.
Certification by Commission.
9006.
Payments to eligible candidates.
9007.
Examinations and audits; repayments.
9008.
Payments for presidential nominating conventions.
9009.
Reports to Congress; regulations.
9010.
Participation by Commission in judicial proceedings.
9011.
Judicial review.
9012.
Criminal penalties.
[9013.
Repealed.]

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**2018**—Pub. L. 115–141, div. U, title IV, §401(d)(8), Mar. 23, 2018, 132 Stat. 1212, struck out item 9013 "Effective date of chapter".

**1974**—Pub. L. 93–443, title IV, §406(c), Oct. 15, 1974, 88 Stat. 1296, substituted "Payments for presidential nominating conventions" for "Information on proposed expenses" in item 9008.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                              JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         73,553
<SECURITIES>                                  131,033
<RECEIVABLES>                                  50,056
<ALLOWANCES>                                    4,030
<INVENTORY>                                    51,545
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              318,462
<PP&E>                                         56,429
<DEPRECIATION>                                 28,813
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                349,370
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          31,163
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                        2,538
<OTHER-SE>                                    315,669
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  349,370
<SALES>                                       131,706
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              131,706
<CGS>                                               0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  55,092
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                25,030
<INCOME-TAX>                                    8,228
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            16,802
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                   16,802
<EPS-BASIC>                                      0.82
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.82



</TABLE>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 v. 

ISAIAH SHAWN-SAM GLENN, 

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-30198 

D.C. No. 1:17-cr-00013-SPW

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Montana

Susan P. Watters, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 15, 2018

**

Before: SILVERMAN, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

Isaiah Shawn-Sam Glenn appeals from the district court’s judgment and 

challenges the 18-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for 

failure to register as a sexual offender, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2250(a). We 

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

 

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

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

MAY 17 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 17-30198 

Glenn contends that his within-Guidelines sentence is substantively 

unreasonable. He argues that the district court should have imposed a lower 

sentence in light of his mitigating circumstances. The district court did not abuse 

its discretion in imposing Glenn’s sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 

38, 51 (2007). The sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. 

§ 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including the 

risk to the community posed by Glenn’s conduct. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51.

AFFIRMED.
Public Meeting Scheduled on Central Valley Project Improvement Act 

Annual Work Plans for Fiscal Year 2009 

Thursday, December 11, 2008, 1 – 5:00 PM 

Radisson Hotel Sacramento 

500 Leisure Lane 

Agenda 

Introductions and Opening Remarks: 1:00 – 1:20 PM 

 John Engbring & Cesar Blanco – FWS 

 Rick Woodley & Shana Kaplan – BOR 

Anadromous Fish Restoration Program – Section 3406(b)(1) 1:20 – 1:50 PM 

Habitat Restoration Program – Section 3406(b)(1)”other” 1:50 – 2:20 PM 

Red Bluff Diversion Dam – Section 3406(b)(10) 2:20 – 2:50 PM 

BREAK 2:50 – 3:00 PM 

Spawning Gravel – Section 3406(b)(13) 3:00 – 3:30 PM 

Comp. Assessment & Monitoring Program – Section 3406(b)(16) 3:30 – 4:00 PM 

Refuge Water Supply, Conveyance, and Construction Programs 

Sections 3406 (b)(3), (d)(1,2, & 5), and (g) 4:00 – 5:00 PM
##### 



Exhibit 3.5

CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
OF
MERISTAR HOSPITALITY FINANCE CORP. II

1.     The name of the corporation is MeriStar Hospitality Finance
Corp. II

2.     The address of its registered office in the State of Delaware is
Corporation Trust Center, 1209 Orange Street, in the City of Wilmington, County
of New Castle. The name of its registered agent at such address is The
Corporation Trust Company.

3.     The nature of the business or purpose to be conducted or promoted is to
engage in any lawful act or activity for which corporations may be organized
under the General Corporation Law of Delaware.

4.     The board of directors is authorized to make, alter or repeal the
by-laws of the corporation. Election of directors need not be written ballot.

5.     The name and mailing address of the sole incorporator is: Scott Lyons,
c/o Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, 1285 Avenue of the Americas, New
York, NY 10019-6064.

6.     The total number of shares of stock which the corporation shall have
authority to issue is: One Thousand (1,000) and the par value of each of such
shares is One Cent ($.01) amounting in the aggregate to Ten Dollars ($10).

I, THE UNDERSIGNED, being the incorporator hereinbefore named, for the
purpose of forming a corporation pursuant to the General Corporation Law of the
State of Delaware, do make this certificate, hereby declaring and certifying
that this is my act and deed and the facts herein stated are true, and
accordingly have hereunto set my hand this 7th day of December, 2001.

/s/ Scott LyonsSole Incorporator
Scott Lyons
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

 387

 356

 341

 333

 327

 316

 313

 322

 301

 313

 308

 293

 286

 294

 288

 291

 277

 277

 268

 275

 275

 268

 286

 276

 287

 282

 271

 280

 275

 275

 304

 297

 288

 281

 278

 276

 274

 269

 263

 264

 264

 240

 247

 236

 249

 235

 223

 237

 242

 243

 244

 248

 247

 243

 245

 249

 247

 246

 245

 245

 333

 318

 306

 297

 293

 286

 284

 283

 276

 274

 273

 267

 263

 260

 262

 260

 248

 253

 252

 252

 253

 253

 256

 254

 258

 259

 256

 255

 254

 254

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

JUNE 2018 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: July 16, 2018

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

VICTORIA CANAL ON THE MIDDLE RIVER
§ 3504.12 What payments do I submit to BLM and what payments do I submit to MMS? ( a ) *Fees and rentals.* ( 1 ) Pay all filing and processing fees, all first-year rentals, and all bonus bids for leases to the BLM State Office that manages the lands you are interested in. Make your instruments payable to the U.S. Department of the Interior—Bureau of Land Management.
( 2 ) Pay all second-year and subsequent rentals and all other payments for leases to the Minerals Management Service (MMS). See 30 CFR part 218 for MMS's payment procedures.
( b ) *Royalties.* Pay all royalties on producing leases and all payments under leases in their minimum production period to the MMS.
[64 FR 53536, Oct. 1, 1999, as amended at 70 FR 58877, Oct. 7, 2005]
§ 3432.3 Terms and conditions. ( a ) The terms and conditions of the original lease shall be made consistent with the laws, regulations, and lease terms applicable at the time of modification except that if the original lease was issued prior to August 4, 1976, the minimum royalty provisions of section 6 of the Federal Coal Leasing Amendments Act of 1976 (30 U.S.C. 207; 43 CFR 3473.3-2) shall not apply to any lands covered by the lease prior to its modification until the lease is readjusted.
( b ) Before a lease is modified, the lessee shall file a written acceptance of the conditions imposed in the modified lease and a written consent of the surety under the bond covering the original lease to the modification of the lease and to extension of the bond to cover the additional land.
( c ) Before modifying a lease, BLM will prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement covering the proposed lease area in accordance with 40 CFR parts 1500 through 1508.
( d ) For coal lease modification applications involving lands in the National Forest System, BLM will submit the lease modification application to the Secretary of Agriculture for consent, for completion or consideration of an environmental assessment, for the attachment of appropriate lease stipulations, and for making any other findings prerequisite to lease issuance.
[44 FR 42628, July 19, 1979, as amended at 67 FR 63567, Oct. 15, 2002]
1 

UNITIED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION 

VERONICA BRAYMAN, CASE NO.: 9:20-cv-80717 

 Plaintiff, 

vs. 

STATE FARM BANK F.S.B., 

 Defendant. 

________________________________/ 

NOTICE OF PENDING SETTLEMENT AS TO STATE FARM BANK F.S.B. 

Plaintiff, Veronica Brayman (“Plaintiff”), by and through undersigned counsel, hereby 

submits this Notice of Pending Settlement as to State Farm Bank F.S.B., and states that Plaintiff 

and Defendant, State Farm Bank F.S.B., have reached a settlement in principle with regard to this 

case and are presently drafting, finalizing, and executing the settlement and dismissal documents. 

Plaintiff and Defendant, State Farm Bank F.S.B, expect to file the appropriate dismissal 

documents within sixty (60) days. 

 Dated this 5th day of October, 2020. 

 /s/ Christopher W. Boss 

Christopher W. Boss, Esq.

Fla. Bar No.: 13183 

Andrea D. Abercrombie, Esq. 

Fla. Bar No.: 91402 

BOSS LAW 

Email: cpservice@bosslegal.com 

9887 4th Street North, Suite 202 

St. Petersburg, Florida 33702 

Phone: (727) 471-0039 

Fax: (888) 449-8792 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

Case 9:20-cv-80717-DMM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/05/2020 Page 1 of 2
2 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 5th day of October 2020, I electronically filed the 

foregoing document with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing 

document is being served this day on all counsel of record or pro se parties either via transmission 

of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those 

counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing, 

including the following: 

David A. Mercer, Esq. 

Butler Weihmuller Katz Craig LLP 

400 N. Ashley Drive, Suite 2300 

Tampa, FL 33602 

dmercer@butler.legal 

 Counsel for State Farm Bank, F.S.B. 

/s/ Christopher W. Boss 

Christopher W. Boss, Esq.

Case 9:20-cv-80717-DMM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/05/2020 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 32.1

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Annual Report of Renovo Holdings (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB/A for the period ended December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Stephen W. Carnes, President and Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, 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 Company. |
|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

/s/Stephen E. Carnes 

| Stephen W. Carnes |  
President and Chief Accounting Officer

September 1, 2005

 
 

 

 

 

  |
|-------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
#### Eli Peck *et al. v.*James Herrington.

*At Ottawa, September Term, 1882.*

*Appeal—in suit to restrain threatened injury to land.*In the ease of a suit in chancery to restrain the defendant from inflicting a threatened injury upon the land of complainant, as, in the matter of opening a ditch upon the land of defendant, through which the water in certain ponds, also on the land of defendant, would be discharged upon the land of complainant, an appeal will lie from a judgment of the Appellate Court to this court. Such a suit is not for the recovery of money, and does not fall within the category of cases in which a right of appeal is made to depend upon the amount in controversy.

Appeal from the Appellate Court for the Second District; —heard in that court on appeal from the Circuit Court of Kane county.

Herrington exhibited his bill in chancery in the circuit court, against Peck and Booth, by which it was sought to enjoin the defendants from opening a ditch on their own lands, through which the water of certain ponds on the lands of defendants would be discharged upon the lands of complainant. The circuit court dismissed the bill. . On appéal to the Appellate Court, that court found the facts differently from the circuit court, in respect to the threatened injury to *89the lands of complainant, which would result from the opening of the ditch on.defendants’ land, and reversed the decree dismissing the hill, directing the circuit court to enter a decree in conformity to the finding and opinion of the Appellate Court. Prom the judgment of the Appellate Court the defendants appealed to this court, and now the appellee moves to dismiss this appeal, upon the ground that it does not appear from the record that the amount in controversy is $1000.

Mr. B. C. Cook, for the motion,

contended that while the bill was only for an injunction to prevent a threatened injury to lands, yet the extent of the injury so sought to be prevented was susceptible of direct proof, and the record should show the amount in controversy, in order that this court might be informed as to the right to maintain this appeal. In the absence of such showing the appeal ought to be dismissed.

Mr.- Charles Wheaton, *contra.*

Mulkey, J.:

This was not a suit for the recovery of money, but simply to restrain a person from inflicting a threatened injury on the appellee’s land. It does not fall within the category of any of those cases in which a right of appeal is made to depend upon the amount in controversy. The ease falls within the residuary clause of the 8th section of the Appellate Court act, (Sess. Laws 1877, 70,) which gives the right of appeal from the Appellate Court to this court “in all other cases” not embraced in the enumeration in the preceding part of that section. We think the appeal will lie.

*Motion denied.*