alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### BALCH BROS. & WEST CO.,

Appellant, v. WELLS, Respondent. (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

January 20, 1903.)

Action by the Balch Bros. & West Company against Myrtilla Wells.

PER CURIAM.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide event, upon questions of law only, the facts having been examined and no error found therein. Held, that the referee erred in receiving in evidence Exhibits 3, 4, 5, and 6 over the objections of the plaintiff.
### §7383e. Repealed. Pub. L. 114–113, div. M, title VII, §701(e), Dec. 18, 2015, 129 Stat. 2930

Section, Pub. L. 106–65, div. C, title XXXI, §3151, Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 939, related to annual report by the President on espionage by the People's Republic of China.
### I N THE UNI TED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FI F TH CI RCUI T

No. 12-20104 Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. FRANCISCO MARTINEZ OLGUIN, also known as Francisco Martinez, also known as Francisco Olguin Martinez, also known as Francisco Olquin Martinez, also known as Jose Martinez, Defendant-Appellant

A ppeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:11-CR-520-1
Before STEWART, Chief Judge, and OWEN and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Francisco Martinez O lguin (Martinez) a p p eals t he 45-month s entence imposed following his conviction f or illegal reentry. He contends that the district court erred in enhancing his sentence for a crime of violence under United States Sentencing G uidelines § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) based o n his Texas conviction f or indecency with a child under Texas Penal Code § 21.11(a)(1) and ( d) (2003). His U n i t e d S t a te s C o u r t o f A p p e al s

F i f t h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D J uly11, 2013 Ly l e W . Cay ce Clerk

* Purs uant to 5 T H C I R
. R

. 47. 5, the court has d eterm ined that this op inion should not be p ublis hed and is not p reced ent excep t und er the lim ited circum s tances s et forth in 5 T H C I R
. R. 47. 5. 4. Case: 12-20104 Document: 00512304129 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/11/2013No. 12-20104

challenge is foreclosed by our decisions in United States v. Cabecera Rodriguez , 711 F.3d 541, 562 & n.28 (5th Cir. 2013) ( en banc), petition for cert. filed , (June 6, 2013)(No. 12-10695) and United States v. Quiroga-Hernandez , 6 98 F .3d 227, 228 (5th Cir. 2012). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

2 Case: 12-20104 Document: 00512304129 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/11/2013
Dolan Chemical Laboratory

4001 Bixby Road

Groveport, OH 43125

T: 614-836-4221, Audinet 210-4221

F: 614-836-4168, Audinet 210-4168

http://aepenv/labs

Water Analysis

Location: Mountaineer Plant Report Date: 5/3/2012

Form REP-702

Rev. 0, 4/2012

Sample Number: 121815-001 Date Collected: 04/19/2012 14:45 Date Received: 4/20/2012

 Trip Blank

Parameter Result Units RL MDL Analysis By Analysis Date/Time Method

Mercury, Hg < 0.5 ng/L 0.5 0.2 TLT 04/30/2012 EPA 1631E

Sample Number: 121815-002 Date Collected: 04/19/2012 14:45 Date Received: 4/20/2012

 Field Blank

Parameter Result Units RL MDL Analysis By Analysis Date/Time Method

Mercury, Hg < 0.5 ng/L 0.5 0.2 TLT 04/30/2012 EPA 1631E

Sample Number: 121815-003 Date Collected: 04/11/2012 11:00 Date Received: 4/20/2012

Bioreactor Effluent 

Parameter Result Units RL MDL Analysis By Analysis Date/Time Method

Mercury, Hg 79.1 ng/L 5 2 TLT 04/30/2012 EPA 1631E

Sample Number: 121815-004 Date Collected: 04/19/2012 14:50 Date Received: 4/20/2012

Bioreactor Effluent 

Parameter Result Units RL MDL Analysis By Analysis Date/Time Method

Mercury, Hg 23.3 ng/L 5 2 TLT 04/30/2012 EPA 1631E

Sample Number: 121815-005 Date Collected: 04/19/2012 14:50 Date Received: 4/20/2012

CPS Effluent 

Parameter Result Units RL MDL Analysis By Analysis Date/Time Method

Mercury, Hg 99.1 ng/L 10 4 TLT 04/30/2012 EPA 1631E

Sample Number: 121815-006 Date Collected: 04/19/2012 14:50 Date Received: 4/20/2012

Plant Outfall #001 

Parameter Result Units RL MDL Analysis By Analysis Date/Time Method

Mercury, Hg 2.8 ng/L 2 1 TLT 04/30/2012 EPA 1631E

THIS TEST REPORT RELATES ONLY TO THE ITEMS TESTED AND SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED EXCEPT IN FULL WITHOUT WRITTEN 

APPROVAL OF THE LABORATORY. ALL TEST RESULTS MEET ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ACCREDITING AUTHORITY, 

UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.

Brian Snyder, Chemist II

Email bssnyder@aep.com Tel. 614-836-4224

Fax 614-836-4168 Audinet 210-4224

Mountaineer Plant, 121815 Page 1 of 1
### §3207. Multi-benefit projects to improve watershed health

#### (a) Definition of eligible applicant

In this section, the term "eligible applicant" means—

(1) a State;

(2) a Tribal or local government;

(3) an organization with power or water delivery authority;

(4) a regional authority; or

(5) a nonprofit conservation organization.

#### (b) Establishment of competitive grant program

Not later than 1 year after November 15, 2021, the Secretary, in consultation with the heads of relevant agencies, shall establish a competitive grant program under which the Secretary shall award grants to eligible applicants for the design, implementation, and monitoring of conservation outcomes of habitat restoration projects that improve watershed health in a river basin that is adversely impacted by a Bureau of Reclamation water project by accomplishing 1 or more of the following:

(1) Ecosystem benefits.

(2) Restoration of native species.

(3) Mitigation against the impacts of climate change to fish and wildlife habitats.

(4) Protection against invasive species.

(5) Restoration of aspects of the natural ecosystem.

(6) Enhancement of commercial, recreational, subsistence, or Tribal ceremonial fishing.

(7) Enhancement of river-based recreation.

#### (c) Requirements

#### (1) In general

In awarding a grant to an eligible applicant under subsection (b), the Secretary—

(A) shall give priority to an eligible applicant that would carry out a habitat restoration project that achieves more than 1 of the benefits described in that subsection; and

(B) may not provide a grant to carry out a habitat restoration project the purpose of which is to meet existing environmental mitigation or compliance obligations under Federal or State law.

#### (2) Compliance

A habitat restoration project awarded a grant under subsection (b) shall comply with all applicable Federal and State laws.

#### (d) Cost-sharing requirement

The Federal share of the cost of any habitat restoration project that is awarded a grant under subsection (b)—

(1) shall not exceed 50 percent of the cost of the habitat restoration project; or

(2) in the case of a habitat restoration project that provides benefits to ecological or recreational values in which the nonconsumptive water conservation benefit or habitat restoration benefit accounts for at least 75 percent of the cost of the habitat restoration project, as determined by the Secretary, shall not exceed 75 percent of the cost of the habitat restoration project.

(Pub. L. 117–58, div. D, title IX, §40907, Nov. 15, 2021, 135 Stat. 1125.)

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

#### Wage Rate Requirements

For provisions relating to rates of wages to be paid to laborers and mechanics on projects for construction, alteration, or repair work funded under div. D or an amendment by div. D of Pub. L. 117–58, including authority of Secretary of Labor, see section 18851 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare.
China Shengda Packaging Group Inc.: Exhibit 10.4 - Filed by newsfilecorp.com





Exhibit 10.4

China Packaging Group Inc.

Nov. 1, 2010

Dear Mr. Michael Zhang:

Re.: Independent directorship

We are writing to confirm your appointment as an independent director of
China Packaging Group, Inc. (the "Company"), which is currently listed on the OTCBB under CPAK.OB.

Following your acceptance, your appointment will be effective as of Nov. 1,
2010. You are entitled to an annual director's fee of US$20,000, or its RMB
equivalent. Your annual fee will be payable monthly.

You hereby agree to maintain the confidentiality of the confidential
information and trade secrets of the Company, including but not limited to, any
confidential information and statistics, business plans, operations,
technologies, know-how, systems and/or the proposed sale, purchase and use of
services and products furnished in oral, visual, written and/or other tangible
form and not to disclose such information to any third party without the prior
consent of the Company.

Please confirm your acceptance of the appointment as an independent director
of the Company by signing, dating and returning to us the attached copy of this
letter.

Yours faithfully,



/s/ Fang Nengbin

Fang Nengbin

Chairman of the Board

I hereby confirm my acceptance to act as an independent director of the
Company upon the terms contained in this letter.



/s/ Michael Zhang

Michael Zhang



Date: Nov. 1, 2010
```

[House Report 110-487]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

110th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                    110-487

======================================================================

 
 PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE CONFERENCE REPORT TO ACCOMPANY THE 
 BILL (H.R. 2082) TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008 FOR 
 INTELLIGENCE AND INTELLIGENCE-RELATED ACTIVITIES OF THE UNITED STATES 
     GOVERNMENT, THE COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT, AND THE CENTRAL 
  INTELLIGENCE AGENCY RETIREMENT AND DISABILITY SYSTEM, AND FOR OTHER 
                                PURPOSES

                                _______
                                

 December 11, 2007.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

  Mr. Hastings of Florida, from the Committee on Rules, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                       [To accompany H. Res. 859]

    The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration 
House Resolution 859, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to 
the House with the recommendation that the resolution be 
adopted.

                SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

    The resolution provides for consideration of the conference 
report to accompany H.R. 2082, the ``Intelligence Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2008.'' The rule waives all points of order 
against the conference report and its consideration.

                         EXPLANATION OF WAIVERS

    The waiver of all points of order against the conference 
report and against its consideration includes a waiver of 
clause 9 of rule XXII (precluding conferees from including 
matter outside the scope of conference). Although the rule 
waives all points of order against the conference report and 
against its consideration, the conference report does not 
violate either clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI (requiring earmarks 
to be disclosed and requiring conference reports to be in 
compliance with the paygo rule).

                                  

```
Description of oral consulting agreement between the Company and Dr. Burstein



  
 Exhibit 10.2 

Description of Oral Consulting Agreement 

Between Albert Burstein and Exactech, Inc. 

Exactech, Inc. entered into an oral consulting agreement with Albert Burstein, Ph.D., a director of the Company, to provide services regarding many
facets of the orthopaedic industry including product design rationale, manufacturing and development techniques and product sales and marketing. Pursuant to this agreement, Exactech pays Dr. Burstein $180,000 each year, as compensation under
the consulting agreement for the following services: 
  

	 	•	 	 Technical design consultation of various orthopaedic implant and instrumentation development projects; 



 

	 	•	 	 Medical education and training for orthopaedic surgeons; 



 

	 	•	 	 Medical education and training for Exactech sales and marketing organization; 



 

	 	•	 	 Mentorship and education of Exactech engineers; 


  

	 	•	 	 3 days per month on-site consultation at Exactech corporate headquarters; and 



 

	 	•	 	 Approximately 20 additional days off-site.
#### GLASS, Respondent, v. PENN, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

February 15, 1905.)

Action bv Siegfried Glass, agent, etc., against Samuel Penn.

PER CURIAM.

Final order of the Municipal Court affirmed, with costs.

HOOKER, J., not voting.
### §9656. Transportation of hazardous substances; listing as hazardous material; liability for release

(a) Each hazardous substance which is listed or designated as provided in section 9601(14) of this title shall, within 30 days after October 17, 1986, or at the time of such listing or designation, whichever is later, be listed and regulated as a hazardous material under chapter 51 of title 49.

(b) A common or contract carrier shall be liable under other law in lieu of section 9607 of this title for damages or remedial action resulting from the release of a hazardous substance during the course of transportation which commenced prior to the effective date of the listing and regulation of such substance as a hazardous material under chapter 51 of title 49, or for substances listed pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, prior to the effective date of such listing: Provided, however, That this subsection shall not apply where such a carrier can demonstrate that he did not have actual knowledge of the identity or nature of the substance released.

(Pub. L. 96–510, title III, §306(a), (b), Dec. 11, 1980, 94 Stat. 2810; Pub. L. 99–499, title II, §202, Oct. 17, 1986, 100 Stat. 1695.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

In subsecs. (a) and (b), "chapter 51 of title 49" substituted for "the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act [49 App. U.S.C. 1801 et seq.]" on authority of Pub. L. 103–272, §6(b), July 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 1378, the first section of which enacted subtitles II, III, and V to X of Title 49, Transportation.

#### Amendments

1986—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 99–499, §202(a), substituted "within 30 days after October 17, 1986" for "within ninety days after December 11, 1980" and inserted "and regulated" before "as a hazardous material".

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 99–499, §202(b), inserted "and regulation" after "prior to the effective date of the listing".
EXHIBIT 32.2

INTERLINE BRANDS, INC.

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 of Interline Brands, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period
ending December 26, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Thomas J. Tossavainen, Chief Financial 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:



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.

/s/ THOMAS J. TOSSAVAINEN Thomas J. Tossavainen Chief Financial OfficerFebruary 25, 2009


---



QuickLinks
#### § 711.101 Purpose.

The purpose of this regulation is to effectuate section 119 of the Rehabilitation, Comprehensive Services, and Developmental Disabilities Amendments of 1978, which amended section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 to prohibit discrimination on the basis of handicap in programs or activities conducted by Executive agencies or the United States Postal Service.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32.1

      CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                 PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, R. Greg Smith, certify to the best of my knowledge based upon a review of the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of ERF Wireless, Inc. for the quarter ended June
30, 2006 (the "Form 10-QSB"), that the Form 10-QSB fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and that information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of ERF
Wireless, Inc. for the periods covered by the Form 10-QSB.

Date:  August 21, 2006

By: /s/ R. Greg Smith
    -----------------
    R. Greg Smith,
    Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
### §300aa–32. Judicial review

A petition for review of a regulation under this part may be filed in a court of appeals of the United States within 60 days from the date of the promulgation of the regulation or after such date if such petition is based solely on grounds arising after such 60th day.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XXI, §2132, as added Pub. L. 99–660, title III, §311(a), Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3778.)
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

ROBERT LEE SWANSON,

Defendant.

Case No. 09-cr-00475-SI-1 

ORDER SETTING BRIEFING 

SCHEDULE AND DENYING AS MOOT 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO ALTER 

JUDGMENT 

Re: Dkt. Nos. 30, 32, 34

On September 26, 2016, the government filed a response to this Court’s Order to Show 

Cause. The same day, the government filed an opposition to defendant’s pending motion to vacate 

his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The government has apologized for its repeated 

failures to meet deadlines in this case and states that in an effort to mitigate the prejudice that 

government counsel’s neglect has created, the government is not asking for a stay in this case.

In light of the government’s response, the Court finds it appropriate to resolve this matter 

on the merits. The Court orders as follows: (1) defendant may file a reply by October 21, 2016, 

and (2) defendant’s motion to alter judgment, which was predicated on the government’s failure to 

oppose the § 2255 motion, is DENIED AS MOOT. After the briefing on the § 2255 motion is 

complete, the Court will schedule a hearing on the matter if the Court deems it necessary. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 6, 2016

______________________________________

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:09-cr-00475-SI Document 35 Filed 10/06/16 Page 1 of 1
Order entered February 16, 2023

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 22

- 01036

- CV
IN THE INTEREST OF L.L.V., A CHILD
On Appeal from the 416th Judicial District Court

Col lin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 416

- 56612

- 2021

O RDER Before the Court is appellant’s February 15, 2023 motion for an extension of
time to file his brief. We GRANT the motion. We ORDER the brief tendered to this Court by appellant on February 15 , 2023 filed as of the date of this order. Also before the Court is appellant’s February 6, 2023 motion for reconsideration of this Court’ s January 26, 2023 order denying an extension
motion. We DENY the motion as moot. Appellee’s brief is due on or bef ore March 8, 2023 . Because this is an accelerated appeal involving the termination of parental rights, any extension request will be strongly disfavored.

/s/ EMILY MISKEL JUSTICE
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2597 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2597

 To suspend temporarily the duty on suspension system stabilizer bars.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 24, 2005

 Mr. Reichert introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To suspend temporarily the duty on suspension system stabilizer bars.

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

SECTION 1. SUSPENSION SYSTEM STABILIZER BARS.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.87.08       Suspension system  Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         stabilizer bars                                                    31/2009
                         of alloy steel of
                         Japan JIS grade
                         SCM525S (26CrMo4)
                         or SCM435H
                         (34CrMo4), each
                         weighing
                         approximately 42
                         kg, comprising
                         one rod measuring
                         approximately
                         98.8 cm in length
                         at each end of
                         which is welded
                         at approximately
                         right angles to a
                         rod measuring
                         approximately 51
                         cm in length
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         8708.99.70), the
                         foregoing
                         designed for use
                         in Class 7 and 8
                         trucks only......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Second Amendment to Executive Change of Control Agreement



  
 Exhibit 10.6

 SECOND AMENDMENT TO EXECUTIVE CHANGE OF CONTROL AGREEMENT 

This SECOND AMENDMENT TO EXECUTIVE CHANGE OF CONTROL AGREEMENT, dated November 4, 2010, is by and between CIRCOR, Inc., a
Massachusetts corporation (the “Company”), and Susan M. McCuaig (the “Executive”). 
 WHEREAS, the Company
and the Executive entered into an executive change in control agreement made as of May 4, 2005, as amended on December 23, 2008 (the “Agreement”); and 
 WHEREAS, the parties desire to increase the benefits to which the Executive may become entitled to upon a Change in Control (as defined in the Agreement). 

NOW, THEREFORE, the Company and the Executive, each intending to be legally bound hereby, do mutually covenant and agree as follows:

 1. Section 3(a)(i) of the Agreement is hereby amended by replacing the phrase “one (1) times” with the
following: 
 “two (2) times” 
 2. Section 3(a)(iv) of the Agreement is hereby amended by replacing the phrase “one (1) year” with the following: 

“two (2) years” 
 3. The Agreement otherwise remains in full force and effect as to all other provisions under said Agreement. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the date first above written. 
  


			
	CIRCOR, INC.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ A. William Higgins

	Name:	 	A. William Higgins
	Title:	 	Chairman, President & CEO
	
	EXECUTIVE
	
	 /s/ Susan M. McCuaig

	Susan M. McCuaig