alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Petition of Lagivalea Eseroma TAULA-PAPA To be Admitted a Citizen of the United States of America.

Petition No. 31598.

United States District Court D. Hawaii.

March 11, 1968.

Immigration and Naturalization Service, by John F. O’Shea, District Director, Movant.

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO REOPEN ORDER AND JUDGMENT OF NATURALIZATION

TAVARES, District Judge.

The Immigration and Naturalization Service, by John F. O’Shea, District Director, hereinafter referred to as the Movant, has moved this Court, under the provisions of Section 340 (j) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.A. § 1451 (j)), and under the provisions of Rule 60(b), Title 28, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to reopen its order and judgment .of naturalization of August 11, 1967, List No. 1932, insofar as it relates to the admission to United States citizenship of the above-named petitioner, hereinafter referred to as the Petitioner, who is noted on page 1, line 15 of said list.

The petitioner herein failed to meet the six months State residence requirement, notwithstanding her eligibility for Section 325 benefits.

The petitioner, in the course of her naturalization proceedings, was well aware that on the day she filed her petition, she had not arrived in Hawaii on November 5, 1966 for the first time and therefore had not resided for six months in Hawaii. She knowingly and wilfully concealed this information for the purpose of facilitating her naturalization.

The information concealed by the petitioner was material to a determination of her qualifications for naturalization and induced the Immigration and Naturalization Service to recommend to this Court that her petition be granted, and induced the Court to grant her petition.

The petitioner has filed a written answer admitting the allegations in the Government’s motion.

It is, therefore, ordered that the movant’s motion to reopen this Court’s order and judgment, List No. 1932, insofar as it relates to the petitioner herein, be and the same is hereby granted.

Petitioner’s request that her petition be withdrawn is hereby granted.
§ 4.626 How will an appeal from a decision be handled? ( a ) If the adjudicative officer is an administrative law judge, you or the Department or other agency may appeal his or her decision on the application to the appeals board that would have jurisdiction over an appeal involving the merits of the proceeding. The appeal will be subject to the same regulations and procedures that would apply to an appeal involving the merits of the proceeding. The appeals board will issue the final Departmental or other agency decision on the application.
( b ) If the adjudicative officer is a panel of appeals board judges, their decision on the application is final for the Department or other agency.
§ 3809.2 What is the scope of this subpart? ( a ) This subpart applies to all operations authorized by the mining laws on public lands where the mineral interest is reserved to the United States, including Stock Raising Homestead lands as provided in § 3809.31(d) and (e). When public lands are sold or exchanged under 43 U.S.C. 682(b) (Small Tracts Act), 43 U.S.C. 869 (Recreation and Public Purposes Act), 43 U.S.C. 1713 (sales) or 43 U.S.C. 1716 (exchanges), minerals reserved to the United States continue to be removed from the operation of the mining laws unless a subsequent land-use planning decision expressly restores the land to mineral entry, and BLM publishes a notice to inform the public.
( b ) This subpart does not apply to lands in the National Park System, National Forest System, and the National Wildlife Refuge System; acquired lands; or lands administered by BLM that are under wilderness review, which are subject to subpart 3802 of this part.
( c ) This subpart applies to all patents issued after October 21, 1976 for mining claims in the California Desert Conservation Area, except for any patent for which a right to the patent vested before that date.
( d ) This subpart does not apply to private land except as provided in paragraphs (a) and (c) of this section. For purposes of analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, BLM may collect information about private land that is near to, or may be affected by, operations authorized under this subpart.
( e ) This subpart applies to operations that involve locatable minerals, including metallic minerals; some industrial minerals, such as gypsum; and a number of other non-metallic minerals that have a unique property which gives the deposit a distinct and special value. This subpart does not apply to leasable and salable minerals. Leasable minerals, such as coal, phosphate, sodium, and potassium; and salable minerals, such as common varieties of sand, gravel, stone, and pumice, are not subject to location under the mining laws. Parts 3400, 3500 and 3600 of this title govern mining operations for leasable and salable minerals.
[65 FR 70112, Nov. 21, 2000, as amended at 66 FR 54860, Oct. 30, 2001]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

CASE NO. 20-60900-CIV-ALTMAN/Hunt

AL DURRANT,

Plaintiff, 

v. 

FISERV, INC., 

Defendant. 

 ______________ / 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Plaintiff’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal 

Without Prejudice [ECF No. 29]. Being fully advised, the Court hereby 

ORDERS that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk shall CLOSE

the case. All pending deadlines are TERMINATED, and any pending motions are DENIED as 

moot. 

DONE AND ORDERED in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 27th day of July 2020. 

 ________________________________ 

 ROY K. ALTMAN 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

cc: counsel of record 

Case 0:20-cv-60900-RKA Document 31 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/28/2020 Page 1 of 1
### §7487. Cross references

**(1) Nonreviewability.—For nonreviewability of Tax Court decisions in small claims cases, see section 7463(b).**

**(2) Transcripts.—For authority of the Tax Court to fix fees for transcript of records, see section 7474.**

(Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 892; Pub. L. 91–172, title IX, §960(i)(1), Dec. 30, 1969, 83 Stat. 735.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1969—Pub. L. 91–172 inserted reference to section 7463(b) for nonreviewability of Tax Court decisions in small claims cases.

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

#### Effective Date of 1969 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 91–172 effective one year after Dec. 30, 1969, see section 962(e) of Pub. L. 91–172, set out as an Effective Date note under section 7463 of this title.
#### § 103.3 May SBA suspend or revoke an Agent's privilege?

The Administrator of SBA or designee may, for good cause, suspend or revoke the privilege of any Agent to conduct business with SBA. Part 134 of this chapter states the procedures for appealing the decision to suspend or revoke the privilege. The suspension or revocation remains in effect during the pendency of any administrative proceedings under part 134 of this chapter.
Exhibit 10.16


 





 


Private & confidential to


 


Steffen Føreid (the
‘Participant’)


 


Stock Options


 


1,000,000 stock options are granted to the Participant on the
terms set out in this allocation letter, in the Stock Option policy and in any resolutions decided upon by either the Board of
Directors or Annual General Assembly.


 


The Options will be subscribed by Freyr AS (the ‘Company’)
and transferred to the Participant immediately after vesting. The Options are granted without consideration from the Participant
other than the relevant Exercise price.


 


The Participant shall pay the Exercise price for each Option
that is exercised. The Exercise Price is determined by the Board of Directors of the Company according to the Stock Option Plan.


 


Grant schedule


 


	 	 	Grant date	 	Options granted	 	Exercise price	 	 
	 	 	24.07.2020	 	375 000	 	1.50 NOK	 	 
	 	 	Financial close 1st facility (Fast track)	 	375 000	 	1.50 NOK	 	options earmarked for the Optionee at the relevant Exercise price, granted after 12 months in the job.
	 	 	Financial close 2nd facility	 	250 000	 	1.50 NOK	 	 
	 	 	TOTAL	 	1 000 000	 	 	 	 
	Vesting date	 	 	 	01.10.2023	 	 	 	 
	Exercise period	 	 	 	01.10.23 - 30.09.25	 	 	 	 



 


Options that have not been exercised by 17:00 hours (CET) on
30.09.25 will lapse without any consideration and may not be exercised by the Participant.


 


	Date: 24th July 2020	 	Date:
	 	 	 
	Place: Oslo	 	Place:
	 	 
	/s/ Tom Jensen	 	/s/ Steffen Føreid
	Tom Jensen, CEO Freyr AS	 	Participant
§ 44.40 How does the Department process payments for lands in the Redwood National Park or Lake Tahoe Basin? This section describes how the Department disburses payments for lands in the Redwood National Park or Lake Tahoe Basin (section 6905 payments). ( a ) The Department disburses payments to qualified local governments only if the administering agency supplies the following information for each qualified local government: ( 1 ) Acreage or interests in land for which the payments are authorized; and
( 2 ) Any other information the Department may require to certify payments to each qualified local government.
( b ) The Department disburses payments until 5 percent of the fair market value is paid in full.
Abatement Order filed December 15, 2020 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-20-00176-CR

____________

CHARLES LEE GORDON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 262nd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1592107

ORDER

The trial court appointed Thomas Lewis to represent appellant on appeal. On 

December 9, 2020, Lewis filed a motion in this court seeking to withdraw as counsel 

because he has accepted an offer of employment with the Office of the Public 

Defender in Santa Fe, New Mexico. 

An appointed attorney shall represent the defendant until 

. . . charges are dismissed, the defendant is acquitted, appeals are 

exhausted, or the attorney is permitted or ordered by the court to 
2

withdraw as counsel for the defendant after a finding of good cause is 

entered on the record. 

Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 26.04(j)(2). 

Accordingly, we ABATE this appeal and order as follows:

1. The judge of the 262nd District Court shall consider Lewis’s request to 

substitute and shall determine whether appellant wishes and is entitled to 

appointed counsel. 

2. The judge shall see that a record of any hearing is made, and shall order 

the trial clerk to forward a record of the hearing and a supplemental clerk’s 

record containing any orders regarding Lewis’s request to withdraw. The 

records shall be filed with this court by February 1, 2021.

3. We will hold Lewis’s motion to withdraw pending receipt of the requested 

records.

The appeal is abated, treated as a closed case, and removed from this court’s 

active docket. The appeal will be reinstated on this court’s active docket after the 

requested records are filed in this court. 

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Wise, and Hassan.
INTERIOR REGION 10 - CALIFORNIA-GREAT BASIN

CALIFORNIA*, NEVADA*, OREGON*; 

*Partial

Ann Lubas-Williams

Regional Financial Manager

United States Department of the Interior

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

Interior Region 10

2800 Cottage Way

Sacramento, California 95825-1898

IN REPLY REFER TO:

CGB-3400

2.2.4.22

To: All Central Valley Project Water Contractors

Subject: 2022 Central Valley Project (CVP) Water Rates

Dear Water Contractor:

The Bureau of Reclamation posted the final 2022 CVP water rates to the Reclamation website,

https://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvpwaterrates/ratebooks/index.html. As included on the website

Foreword for 2022 Water Rates, Reclamation decided that it was appropriate to use the 7-year

average of water deliveries to determine estimated deliveries for 2022 Operation and

Maintenance rates.

Reclamation would like to notify the contractors that for 2022, the water year is critically dry for

irrigation based on the current CVP water allocations. Reclamation expects that the water

deliveries for 2022 will be significantly lower for irrigation than the estimated deliveries used for

the O&M water rate calculation. The lower than average water deliveries will result in an

underestimated O&M component of the irrigation water rate. For the 2022 water year, the CVP

wide irrigation water rate for Water Marketing and Storage is calculated to be roughly $31 per

acre-foot where the rate is expected to be in the $122 per acre-foot range based on the CVP water

allocations.

The purpose of this letter is only to notify water contractors of the underestimated 2022 water

rate, and to provide advance notice of the potential for O&M deficits to occur when the 2022

Annual Contractor Accountings are calculated in August 2023. This letter is for informational

purposes only.

Additionally, it is encouraged that contractors consider the underestimated O&M rates when

selling and transferring water to other water contractors to ensure that enough revenue is

received to pay for the 2022 allocation of CVP O&M costs.

If you have any questions, please contact Sabir Ahmad, Ratesetting Branch Manager, at

sahmad@usbr.gov, or (916) 978-5187.

Sincerely,
§ 4110.3-1 Increasing active use. When monitoring or documented field observations show that additional forage is available for livestock grazing, either on a temporary or sustained yield basis, BLM may apportion additional forage to qualified applicants for livestock grazing use consistent with multiple-use management objectives specified in the applicable land use plan. ( a ) *Additional forage temporarily available.* When the authorized officer determines that additional forage is temporarily available for livestock, he may authorize its use on a nonrenewable basis under § 4130.6-2 in the following order: ( 1 ) To permittees or lessees who have preference for grazing use in the allotment where the forage is available, in proportion to their active use; and
( 2 ) To other qualified applicants under § 4130.1-2.
( b ) *Additional forage available on a sustained yield basis.* When the authorized officer determines that additional forage is available for livestock use on a sustained yield basis, he will apportion it in the following manner: ( 1 ) First, to remove all or a part of the suspension of preference of permittees or lessees with permits or leases in the allotment where the forage is available; and
( 2 ) Second, if additional forage remains after ending all suspensions, the authorized officer will consult, cooperate, and coordinate with the affected permittees or lessees, the state having lands or responsibility for managing resources within the area, the interested public, and apportion it in the following order: ( i ) Permittees or lessees in proportion to their contribution to stewardship efforts that result in increased forage production;
( ii ) Permittees or lessees in proportion to the amount of their grazing preference; and
( iii ) Other qualified applicants under § 4130.1-2.
[71 FR 39504, July 12, 2006]
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsModula-2*: An extension of Modula-2 for highly parallel programsParallel programs should be machine-independent, i.e., independent of properties that are likely to differ from one parallel computer to the next. Extensions are described of Modula-2 for writing highly parallel, portable programs meeting these requirements. The extensions are: synchronous and asynchronous forms of forall statement; and control of the allocation of data to processors. Sample programs written with the extensions demonstrate the clarity of parallel programs when machine-dependent details are omitted. The principles of efficiently implementing the extensions on SIMD, MIMD, and MSIMD machines are discussed. The extensions are small enough to be integrated easily into other imperative languages.Document ID19920002436Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsTichy, Walter F.*(Research Inst. for Advanced Computer Science Moffett Field, CA, United States)*Herter, Christian G.*(Karlsruhe Univ. Germany, F.R. , United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateSeptember 1, 1989Subject CategoryComputer Programming And SoftwareReport/Patent NumberNASA-CR-188855NAS 1.26:188855RIACS-TR-89-34Accession Number92N11654Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NCC2-387Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19920002436.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
#### Florence G. Hendrickson, Respondent, v. Charles C. Hendrickson, Appellant.

Present-—Close, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Taylor and Lewis, JJ.
#### § 404.18 How can I request assistance to conduct a feasibility study?

To request assistance to conduct a feasibility study under § 404.11(a) or (b), consistent with Reclamation's recommendation in an appraisal report, you must submit a full proposal to conduct a feasibility study in response to the program announcement, pursuant to § 404.20. You are not required to submit a statement of interest.
The State 

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 20, 2014

No. 04-14-00041-CR

Kyle MILLER,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 175th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2011CR5502

Honorable Pat Priest, Judge Presiding

ORDER

On June 16, 2014, pro se appellant Kyle Miller, who is indigent, filed a letter which we 

construe as a motion for a free reporter’s record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 20.2. 

Appellant’s motion for a free reporter’s record is GRANTED. We ORDER the trial court 

clerk to (1) provide Appellant with a printed copy of the appellate record, at no cost to Appellant, 

and (2) provide this court with written confirmation that it has complied with this order within 

TEN DAYS of the date of this order. See id.; Newman v. State, 937 S.W.2d 1, 3 (Tex. Crim. 

App. 1996) (“[T]he trial court has a duty to provide an indigent defendant with an adequate 

record on appeal.”). 

Appellant’s brief will be due THIRTY DAYS after we receive written confirmation that 

the trial court clerk has provided Appellant with a printed copy of the reporter’s record. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a). 

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 20th day of June, 2014.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
#### John B. Malatesta, Respondent, v. Empire City Subway Company, Limited, Appellant.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. No opinion. Present—Ingraham, P. J., Laughlin, Clarke, Scott and Dowling, JJ.
- Skip to global NPS navigation
    - Skip to the main content
    - Skip to the footer section

National Park Service**Search

# **OpenMenu**CloseMenu

## Explore This Park

## Explore the National Park Service

## Exiting nps.gov

Ulysses S. Grant and Julia Dent Grant Exhibit
§ 3175.113 Spot samples—general requirements. ( a ) If an FMP is not flowing at the time that a sample is due, a sample must be taken within 15 days after flow is re-initiated. Documentation of the non-flowing status of the FMP must be entered into GARVS as required under § 3175.120(f).
( b ) The operator must notify the AO at least 72 hours before obtaining a spot sample as required by this subpart, or submit a monthly or quarterly schedule of spot samples to the AO in advance of taking samples.
( c ) *Sample cylinder requirements.* Sample cylinders must: ( 1 ) Comply with API 14.1, Subsection 9.1 (incorporated by reference, see § 3175.30);
( 2 ) Have a minimum capacity of 300 cubic centimeters; and
( 3 ) Be cleaned before sampling under GPA 2166-05, Appendix A (incorporated by reference, see § 3175.30), or an equivalent method. The operator must maintain documentation of cleaning (see § 3170.7), have the documentation available on site during sampling, and provide it to the BLM upon request.
( d ) *Spot sampling using portable gas chromatographs.* ( 1 ) Sampling separators, if used, must: ( i ) Be constructed of stainless steel;
( ii ) Be cleaned under GPA 2166-05, Appendix A (incorporated by reference, see § 3175.30), or an equivalent method, prior to sampling. The operator must maintain documentation of cleaning (see § 3170.7), have the documentation available on site during sampling, and provide it to the BLM upon request; and
( iii ) Be operated under GPA 2166-05, Appendix B.3 (incorporated by reference, see § 3175.30).
( 2 ) The sample port and inlet to the sample line must be purged using the gas being sampled before completing the connection between them.
( 3 ) The portable GC must be operated, verified, and calibrated under § 3175.118.
( 4 ) The documentation of verification or calibration required in § 3175.118(d) must be available for inspection by the BLM at the time of sampling.
( 5 ) *Minimum number of samples and analyses.* ( i ) For low- and very-low-volume FMPs, at least three samples must be taken and analyzed;
( ii ) For high-volume FMPs, samples must be taken and analyzed until the difference between the maximum heating value and minimum heating value calculated from three consecutive analyses is less than or equal to 16 Btu/scf;
( iii ) For very-high-volume FMPs, samples must be taken and analyzed until the difference between the maximum heating value and minimum heating value calculated from three consecutive analyses is less than or equal to 8 Btu/scf.
( 6 ) The heating value and relative density used for OGOR reporting must be: ( i ) The mean heating value and relative density calculated from the three analyses required in paragraph (d)(5) of this section;
( ii ) The median heating value and relative density calculated from the three analyses required in paragraph (d)(5) of this section; or
( iii ) Any other method approved by the BLM.
#### § 3933.51 Bond coverage.

Before the BLM will approve an assignment, the assignee must submit to the proper BLM office a new bond in an amount to be determined by the BLM, or, in lieu thereof, documentation of consent of the surety on the present bond to the substitution of the assignee as principal (see subpart 3904 of this chapter).
Order entered November 2, 2018

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 18 - 01015 - CV IN RE GENE E. PHILLI PS, Rela t or Original Proceeding from the County Court at Law No. 1

D allas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC - 13 - 05268 - A



### O RDER On September 17 , 2018, relator filed a “Notice of Pending Settlement” and informed the Court that relator anticipated he would file a motion to dismiss this proceeding after the settlement doc uments are executed. To date, t he Court has received no further correspondence or filings from relator. We ORDER relator to file either a report on the status of settlement or a motion to dismiss this proceeding by November 9 , 2018 . We caution relator t hat failure to comply with this order may result in the dismissal of his petition for writ of mandamus

. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 42.3(c).

/s/ BILL WHITEHILL JUSTICE
### **Subchapter A—Gallonage and Occupational Taxes**

Part
I.
Gallonage taxes.
II.
Miscellaneous provisions.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**2005**—Pub. L. 109–59, title XI, §11125(b)(1)(B), Aug. 10, 2005, 119 Stat. 1953, substituted "Miscellaneous provisions" for "Occupational tax" in item for part II.