alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §1742. Search, rescue, and protection forces; emergency situations authorizing hiring

Where in his judgment sufficient search, rescue, and protection forces are not otherwise available, the Secretary is authorized in cases of emergency to incur such expenses as may be necessary (a) in searching for and rescuing, or in cooperating in the search for and rescue of, persons lost on the public lands, (b) in protecting or rescuing, or in cooperating in the protection and rescue of, persons or animals endangered by an act of God, and (c) in transporting deceased persons or persons seriously ill or injured to the nearest place where interested parties or local authorities are located.

(Pub. L. 94–579, title III, §312, Oct. 21, 1976, 90 Stat. 2768.)
#### Evaristo Llorens, Appellant, *v.*Jacinto Costa et al., Respondents.

(Submitted January 17, 1882;

decided January 24, 1882.)

*Paul Fuller*for appellant.

*James K.*Hill, *Wing*and *Shoudy*for respondents.

Agree to dismiss appeal; no opinion.

All concur.

Appeal dismissed.
### §12152. Denial or revocation of endorsement for non-payment of civil penalty

If the owner of a vessel fails to pay a civil penalty imposed by the Secretary, the Secretary may deny the issuance or renewal of an endorsement, or revoke the endorsement, on a certificate of documentation issued for the vessel under this chapter.

(Pub. L. 109–304, §5, Oct. 6, 2006, 120 Stat. 1508.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 12152 | 46:12123. | |

Section
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
THE ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-KSB AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 10-KSB.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         295,559
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                      19,072,788
<DEPRECIATION>                               7,160,891
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              13,859,660
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          945,376
<BONDS>                                      8,537,759
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,376,525
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                13,859,660
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,823,672
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                8,886,993
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             693,116
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                243,563
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            243,563
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   243,563
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.27
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.27


</TABLE>
# CONTAINS NOCSI . 

# (am . November 3, 2010 p. 1 

## 33 boo c~lJl 6 l Zd4-0/1,3

Director, Chemical Control Division (7405M) Room 4146 EPA East U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1201 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004 202-564-4760

Attn:

Re: DuPont Corporate Remediation Group Chestnut Run Plaza, Building 715 4417 Lancaster Pike Wilmington, DE 19805 Document Control Office Office of Pollution Prevention andToxics EPA East, Room

6428 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1201 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004 202-564-8930 EPA Docket ID Number OPPT-2004-0113 Memorandum

ofUnderstanding (MOU) between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and E. I . DuPont de Nemours and Company (DuPont) for a Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) Site-Related Environmental Assessment Program (November 3, 2005) Quarterly MOU Status Report #20, Phase 11 Monitoring/Sampling Work Plan, DuPont Washington Works (November 3, 2010) Dear Sir/Madam

: This Quarterly MOUStatus Report #20 is submitted in accordance with Section V.B.3 ofthe above-identified MOU . All Phase II Work Plan related activities have been completed and the Assessments, required under Section V . D., have been submitted to EPA . In addition, the Peer Consultation Process (PCP) required under Section V.E.2 ofthe MOU is currently underway. Data reported in this quarterly MOU status report were received by DuPont as ofOctober 15, 2010, are not part of the Phase 11 MOU monitoring activities, but provided by DuPont for completeness of study. An index of this status report is provided as an Attachment to this letter. If you need any additional information or further clarification, please contact me (302-999-6197) or Jenny Liu (302-999-3628)

. Very truly yours, 

# C.VZA4ftAndrew S. Hartten Project Director Attachment : Enclosures : r., '

---- rri

.; E Index of report documents (1 page) _`-~ 1 paper copy ofthe Quarterly MOU Status Report #20 - November 3, 2010 1 digital copy of the Quarterly MOUStatus Report #20 - November 3, 2010

E.I . du Pont de Nemours and CompanyDocket No. OPPT-2004-0113 November 3, 2010 EPA-DuPont MOU Index

Final Analytical Sampling Results -Ouarterly _MOU Status Report #20 Document/Report Title-Paper Copy No. of Pazes* 1 paper copy of the Quarterly MOUStatus Report #20, 188 pages Phase 11 Monitoring/Sampling Work Plan, DuPont Washington Works (OPPT-2004-0113 PFOA Site-Related Environmental Assessment Program) Document/Report Title-Electronic Copy No . of Pazes CD 1 of 1 containing the Quarterly MOU Status Report #20, 186 pages Phase 11 Monitoring/Sampling Work Plan, DuPont Washington Works (OPPT-2004-0113 PFOA Site-Related Environmental Assessment Program) as one PDF file titled, Quarterly MOU Status Report #20 110310.PDF Page count does not include blank pages caused by double-sided printing ofthe tables.

Page 2 of 2 OPPT-2004-0113 PFOA Site-Related Environmental Assessment Program
(No. 86-CC-1220

#### Craig Randich, Claimant, *v.*The Illinois Department of Corrections, a division of The State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed August 18, 1986.*

Craig Randich, *pro se,*for Claimant.

Neil F. Hartigan, Attorney General (Robert J. Sklamberg, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel), for Respondent.

Patchett, J.

This matter is before the Court upon the joint stipulation of the parties hereto. This claim sounds in tort and is brought pursuant to section 8(d) of the Court of Claims Act. Ill. Rev. Stat. 1985, ch. 37, par. 439.8(d).

On or about July 4, 1985, a tractor operated by an inmate of Stateville Correctional Center struck Claimant’s automobile at a location just outside the prison ¿remises. At the time of the incident, said inmate was engaged in certain work at the request and direction of Respondent. As a result of this incident, Claimant sustained damage to his automobile.

We note that the parties hereto have agreed to a settlement of this claim and that Respondent agrees to the entry of an award in favor of Claimant in the amount of three hundred one dollars and seventy-seven cents ($301.77).

Based on the foregoing, Claimant, Craig Randich, is hereby awarded the sum of three hundred one dollars *197and seventy-seven cents ($301.77), in full and final satisfaction of this claim.
§ 180.210 Withdrawal or disqualification of ALJ. ( a ) *Disqualification.* If an ALJ finds that there is a basis for his/her disqualification in a proceeding, the ALJ shall withdraw from the proceeding. Withdrawal is accomplished by entering a notice in the record and providing a copy of the notice to the Chief Administrative Law Judge.
( b ) *Motion for recusal.* If a party believes that the presiding ALJ should be disqualified for any reason, the party may file a motion to recuse with the ALJ. The motion shall be supported by an affidavit setting forth the alleged grounds for disqualification. The ALJ shall rule on the motion, stating the grounds therefor.
( c ) *Redesignation of ALJ.* If an ALJ is disqualified, another ALJ shall be designated to preside over further proceedings.
[61 FR 52218, Oct. 4, 1996, as amended at 73 FR 13723, Mar. 13, 2008; 87 FR 8197, Feb. 14, 2022]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

DENIED

Judge James Ware

1/27/2010

Case 3:09-cv-02079-JCS Document 259 Filed 01/27/10 Page 1 of 3
The Hearing remains on calendar as previously set for February 8, 2010 at 9:00 AM. 

27

Case 3:09-cv-02079-JCS Document 259 Filed 01/27/10 Page 2 of 3
Case 3:09-cv-02079-JCS Document 259 Filed 01/27/10 Page 3 of 3
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-146167 on Form S-8
of our reports dated February 24, 2010, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule of RiskMetrics Group, Inc. and subsidiaries (the "Company") and
the effectiveness of the Company's internal control over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31,
2009.

/s/
Deloitte & Touche LLP

New
York, New York
February 24, 2010

---



QuickLinks
#### Estela B. Sanguinetti v. Alberto A. Sanguinetti.

Motion to dismiss appeals granted, with $10 costs, unless the appellant notices the appeals for argument or submission for the November 1960 Term of this court on or before October 24, 1960. Respondent’s points are to be served and filed on or before November 4, 1960. Reply points, if any, are to be served and filed on or before November 9, 1960. Concur — ■ Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Valente, McNally and Bastow, JJ.
AD Economic Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2012-0086 Directorate ID: 2011-SW-045-AD

Helicopter Model: Eurocopter France Model EC130B4 Helicopters

Number of Helicopters (U.S. Operators): 109 Helicopters in the US Registry.

Reason: The actions of this AD are intended to prevent structural failure of the tail boom, 

resulting in detachment of the Fenestron (tail rotor) and subsequent loss of control of the 

helicopter.

Costs:

Parts per Helicopter $60,000 for the replacement

Labor per Helicopter

(1 work-hour x $85/workhour for the inspection)

(50 work-hours x 

$85/work-hour for the 

replacement)

$85

$4,250

Other (Explain)

Total Cost per Helicopter $85

$64,250 for the replacement

Total US Fleet Cost $9,265 for the inspection

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action?” Yes ( ) No ()

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No ()

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

Yes ( ) No ()

Project Engineer: Jim Grigg
### SUBCHAPTER IX—CONSTRUCTION CHARGES
#### § 570.905 Review of continuing capacity to carry out CDBG funded activities in a timely manner.

If HUD determines that the recipient has not carried out its CDBG activities and certifications in accordance with the requirements and criteria described in § 570.901 or 570.902, HUD will undertake a further review to determine whether or not the recipient has the continuing capacity to carry out its activities in a timely manner. In making the determination, the Department will consider the nature and extent of the recipient's performance deficiencies, types of corrective actions the recipient has undertaken and the success or likely success of such actions.
### §42103. No preference to Government-owned vessels

A regulation may not give a vessel owned by the United States Government a preference over a vessel owned by citizens of the United States and documented under the laws of the United States.

(Pub. L. 109–304, §7, Oct. 6, 2006, 120 Stat. 1549.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 42103 | 46 App.:876(d). | June 5, 1920, ch. 250, §19(d), 41 Stat. 995; Ex. Ord. No. 6166, §12, eff. June 10, 1933; June 29, 1936, ch. 858, title II, §204, title IX, §904, 49 Stat. 1987, 2016; Pub. L. 105–258, title III, §301, Oct. 14, 1998, 112 Stat. 1915. |

Section
### §10301. Application

(a) Except as otherwise specifically provided, this chapter applies to a vessel of the United States—

(1) on a voyage between a port in the United States and a port in a foreign country (except a port in Canada, Mexico, or the West Indies); or

(2) of at least 75 gross tons as measured under section 14502 of this title, or an alternate tonnage measured under section 14302 of this title as prescribed by the Secretary under section 14104 of this title on a voyage between a port of the United States on the Atlantic Ocean and a port of the United States on the Pacific Ocean.

(b) This chapter does not apply to a vessel on which the seamen are entitled by custom or agreement to share in the profit or result of a voyage or to riding gang members.

(c) Unless otherwise provided, this chapter does not apply to a foreign vessel.

(Pub. L. 98–89, Aug. 26, 1983, 97 Stat. 561; Pub. L. 104–324, title VII, §737, Oct. 19, 1996, 110 Stat. 3941; Pub. L. 109–241, title III, §312(c)(2), July 11, 2006, 120 Stat. 533.)

| Revised section | Source section (U.S. Code) |
| --- | --- |
| 10301 | 46:56446:56646:574 |

46:566

46:574

Section 10301 specifies that vessels on foreign and intercoastal voyages (except for fishing vessels and foreign vessels) are subject to the seamen protection and relief provisions contained in chapter 103.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2006—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 109–241 inserted "or to riding gang members" after "voyage".

1996—Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 104–324 inserted "as measured under section 14502 of this title, or an alternate tonnage measured under section 14302 of this title as prescribed by the Secretary under section 14104 of this title" after "75 gross tons".
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<NAME> AETNA
<CIK> 0001022657

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                              75
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   61,737
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     41,268
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 4,004
<PP&E>                                          70,338
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,837
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 206,137
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          122,905
<BONDS>                                         88,125
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                    (10,391)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   206,137
<SALES>                                         65,660
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                65,660
<CGS>                                           57,433
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   57,433
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 5,848
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,845
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,466)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (534)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (932)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (932)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
Order issued October 21, 2014

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

________________________________________ 

No. 05-13-01563-CR 

No. 05-13-01564-CR 

No. 05-13-01565-CR 

No. 05-13-01566-CR 

________________________________________

TRACY REBECCA SIVERT, Appellant 

V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

 

O R D E R 

Before Justices FitzGerald, Fillmore, and Stoddart 

 Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we GRANT the June 5, 2014 motion of Bruce 

C. Kaye for leave to withdraw as appointed counsel on appeal. We DIRECT the Clerk of the 

Court to remove Bruce C. Kaye as counsel of record for appellant. We DIRECT the Clerk of 

the Court to send a copy of this order and all future correspondence to Tracy Rebecca Sivert, 

TDCJ No. 1889094, Plane State Jail, 904 FM 686, Dayton, Texas, 77535. 

/Kerry P. FitzGerald/ 

KERRY P. FITZGERALD 

JUSTICE
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 Quarterly Report of RoomLinX, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10−QSB
for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael S. Wasik, Chief Executive
Officer, hereby 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 consolidated financial condition and consolidated results of operation of
the Company.





Date:
7/1/08





By:    /s/ Michael S.
Wasik


Michael S. Wasik


Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 24-0096

_________________

STATE OF MONTANA,

 Plaintiff and Appellee,

 v.

JOHN D RUNKLE,

 Defendant and Appellant.

O R D E R

_________________

Pursuant to the Internal Operating Rules of this Court, this cause is classified for 

submission on briefs to a five-justice panel of this Court. 

The Clerk is directed to provide a copy hereof to John D Runkle, to all counsel of 

record and to the Honorable Matthew J. Cuffe, District Judge.

For the Court,

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 24 2024

07/24/2024

Case Number: DA 24-0096
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED June 20, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-40225 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JAVIER MARTINEZ-DIAZ, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 1:04-CR-809-ALL

-------------------- Before STEWART, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Javier Martinez-Diaz (Martinez) appeals his guilty plea conviction and sentence for illegally reentering the United States after having been deported previously following an aggravated felony conviction. The Government argues that Martinez’s appeal is barred by the appellate-waiver provision in his plea agreement. We assume, arguendo only, that the waiver does not bar the instant appeal. Martinez argues that the district court erred by ordering him to cooperate in the collection of a DNA sample as a conditionNo. 05-40225 -2- of supervised release. This claim is not ripe for review on direct appeal. See United States v. Riascos-Cuenu , 428 F.3d 1100, 1101-02 (5th Cir. 2005), petition for cert. filed (Jan. 9, 2006) (No. 05-8662). The claim is dismissed. See id. at 1102. Martinez also challenges the constitutionality of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b). However, Martinez’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998). Although Martinez contends that Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that Almendarez-Torres remains binding.
See United States v. Garza-Lopez , 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 298 (2005). Martinez properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of Almendarez-Torres and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review. JUDGMENT AFFIRMED; APPEAL DISMISSED IN PART.