alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §945a. Compensation for rights-of-way for certain reclamation projects

Notwithstanding the existence of any reservation of right-of-way to the United States for canals under section 945 of this title, or any State statute, the Secretary of the Interior shall pay just compensation, including severance damages, to the owners of private land utilized for ditches or canals in connection with any reclamation project, or any unit or any division of a reclamation project, provided the construction of said ditches or canals commenced after January 1, 1961, and such compensation shall be paid notwithstanding the execution of any agreements or any judgments entered in any condemnation proceeding, prior to September 2, 1964.

(Pub. L. 88–561, §1, Sept. 2, 1964, 78 Stat. 808; Pub. L. 89–624, Oct. 4, 1966, 80 Stat. 873.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1966—Pub. L. 89–624 inserted "to the United States" and "or any State statute,".

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

#### Effective Date of 1966 Amendment

Pub. L. 88–561, §3, as added by Pub. L. 89–624, Oct. 4, 1966, 80 Stat. 874, provided that: "The amendment made by this Act [enacting section 945b of this title and amending this section] shall apply to any condemnation action pending in any district court of the United States on the date of enactment of this Act [Oct. 4, 1966] and to any such action instituted after that date."
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                            9
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         9531
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               11929
<TRADING-ASSETS>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    22944
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         12476
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           12570
<LOANS>                                        107658
<ALLOWANCE>                                    1372
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 174399
<DEPOSITS>                                     153118
<SHORT-TERM>                                   184
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            1001
<LONG-TERM>                                    28
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       10995
<OTHER-SE>                                     9073
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 174399
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                2804
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              695
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               3499
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             1470
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             1473
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          2026
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  81
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             1
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                1433
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                750
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     750
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   504
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0.23
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.22
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                 5.43
<LOANS-NON>                                    609
<LOANS-PAST>                                   320
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                               0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               1324
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  49
<RECOVERIES>                                   16
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              1372
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                            0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        1372
        


</TABLE>
### §720. Senate and House Manuals

Each House may order printed as many copies as it desires, of the Senate Manual and of the Rules and Manual of the House of Representatives, even though the cost exceed $500.

(Pub. L. 90–620, Oct. 22, 1968, 82 Stat. 1251.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on 44 U.S. Code, 1964 ed., §148 (Jan. 12, 1895, ch. 23, §73, 28 Stat. 617).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF FATS, INC. FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2000
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           3,443
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,139
<ALLOWANCES>                                       214
<INVENTORY>                                     14,750
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                28,530
<PP&E>                                          10,391
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,025
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  34,799
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           12,722
<BONDS>                                         43,781
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           26,923
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       122,235
<OTHER-SE>                                    (172,150)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    34,799
<SALES>                                         17,639
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                17,639
<CGS>                                           16,585
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   24,539
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,877
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,571
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (11,777)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       (62)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (11,715)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (10,126)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.27)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.27)


</TABLE>
Chico Enterprise-Record 

400 E. Park Ave. 

Chico, Ca 95928 

5:30-896-7702 

erlegal@chicoer.com 

2120551 

BUTTE COUNTY AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT 

DISTRICT 

ATTN: ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 

629 ENTLER AVENUE 

STE15 

CHICO, CA 95928 

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE 

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF BUTTE 

In The Matter Of 

Notice of Public Hearing and Workshop 

.. \ .. 

·'·,'· 

FILE NO. 2016-200.1 

AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION 

STATE OF CALIFORNIA } 

ss. 

COUNTY OF BUTTE 

The undersigned resident of the county of Butte, State of 

California, says: 

That I am , and at all times herein mentioned was a 

citizen of the United States and not a party to nor 

interested in the above entitled matter; that I am the 

principal clerk of the printer and publisher of 

The Chico Enterprise-Record 

The Oroville Mercury-Register 

That said newspaper is one of general circulation as 

defined by Section 6000 Government Code of the State 

of California, Case No. 26796 by the Superior Court of 

the State of California, in and for the County of Butte; 

that said newspaper at all times herein mentioned was 

printed and published daily in the City of Chico and 

9 ounty of Butte; that the notice of which the annexed is a 

··· ~rue printed copy, was published in said newspaper on 

the following days: 

Dated July 16, 2015 

at Chico, California 

(Signature) 

7/15/2015 

Legal No. 0005526855 

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING 

AND WORKSHOP 

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Butte County Air Quality Management District (District) Governing Board will 

hold a public workshop and public hearing to consider 

the proposed amendments to Regulation Ill, Rule 300- . Open Burning Requirements, Prohibitions and Exemptions to streamline the rule to fulfill the program require1 ments needed for full approval into the District's federal 

:State Implementation Plan. 

; The time, date, and location of the public workshop and 

hearing are given below: 

I Public Workshop: Monday, July 20, 2015 at 10 a.m., Butte 

1county Public Library, 1108 Sherman Avenue, Chico, CA. 

lpublic Hearing to Consider Adoption: Thursday, August 

:27, 2015 at 10:00 a.m., Chico City Council Chambers, 421 

rMain Street, Chico, CA. 

l The Staff Report and proposed rule may be reviewed at 

tthe District office at the address below or on the District website: ';','Ww.bcaqmd.org,_ For additional information 

please contact Ursula Parker at (530) 332-9400, ext. 104. \Written comments on the proposed amended rule must 

t be submitted by August 18, 2015 to: Board Clerk, Butte 

<county Air Quality Management District, 629 Entler Aver nue, Suite 15, Chico, CA 95928. 

( DATED: July 15,2015 

I By:\ \\W. James Wagoner AIR POLLUTION CONTROL OFFICER 

Publish: 7/15/15
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1998
<CASH>                                         131,718
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,475,339
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,475,339
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           51,001
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           163
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,268,116
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,475,339
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  110,100
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 39,494
<INCOME-TAX>                                     8,968
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             30,526
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    30,526
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .02
        

</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of Belnord Realty Associates, L.P., Appellant, v New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, Respondent, and Darryl Romanoff, Intervenor-Respondent.

[833 NYS2d 431]

*227Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward H. Lehner, J.), entered April 19, 2006, which dismissed the petition brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 to annul the determinations of respondent Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) revoking the order deeming petitioner eligible for a maximum base rent (MBR) increase for the 2002-2003 cycle, and recalculating the rent of tenant Amalie Zahler in accordance with such order of revocation, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

It was within the broad authority of respondent DHCR to determine whether the proof offered by petitioner bearing upon its purported correction of Code violations was sufficient to demonstrate that it had timely corrected all rent-impairing violations and 80% of all other violations *(see Matter of Brusco W. 78th St. Assoc. v State of N.Y. Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal,*281 AD2d 165 [2001]). DHCR’s determination that petitioner’s proof was insufficient was not irrational *(see id.).*Petitioner relied solely upon the conclusory affidavit of an engineer, from which it was impossible to discern when the violations in question had been corrected. As such, it was impossible to determine whether the violations had been corrected six months before the effective date for the MBR cycle at issue, as is required under the statute and regulations. While petitioner claims that it was DHCR’s “practice” to accept affidavits from engineers that did not specify the dates on which repairs had been made, the governing statute and regulations mandate that an owner certify that violations have been corrected six months prior to the MBR effective date. We also note that an issue had been raised as to the timeliness of the correction of the violations.

That DHCR’s MBR Unit may have issued a prior, unreviewed order of eligibility involving the subject building, based on a similar affidavit of the engineer, does not avail petitioner *(see Matter of 1000 LLC v Calogero,*16 AD3d 106, 107 [2005]; *Matter of 251 W. 98th St. Owners v New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal,*276 AD2d 265 [2000]).

Petitioner’s contention that it did not have an adequate opportunity to submit evidence is without support in the record.

Finally, petitioner was not deprived of due process because Zahler’s petition for administrative review (PAR) was granted in part based on revocation of the order of eligibility for the 2002-2003 MBR. The logical consequence of the revocation was *228that rent would need to be recalculated for all rent-controlled tenants of the subject building. Petitioner was already on notice, by virtue of revocation of the order of eligibility, that it would need to refund excess rents. Due process did not require that it be separately notified that Zahler’s rent was to be recalculated in accordance with the order.

We have considered petitioner’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Andrias, J.E, Friedman, Marlow, Williams and Catterson, JJ.
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALFREDO LEON OREA,

Plaintiff,

 v.

FS SAN FRANCISCO EMPLOYMENT,

INC.’S LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN,

Defendant. /

LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF

NORTH AMERICA,

Real Party in Interest. /

No. C 09-02538 WHA

ORDER RE STIPULATION TO

CONTINUE BRIEFING

SCHEDULE AND HEARING ON

DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

This is an ERISA action challenging a denial of disability benefits. Due to plaintiff

counsel’s health and personal reasons, the parties have stipulated to extend the briefing

schedule and hearing date on defendant’s motion for summary judgment by one week. A

previous extension of one week was granted for the same reasons. Plaintiff’s counsel has

submitted a sworn declaration explaining why the second extension is needed. For good cause

shown, the extension is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s opposition to defendant’s motion for summary

judgment must be filed by FEBRUARY 11, 2010. Defendant’s reply must be filed by 

Case 3:09-cv-02538-WHA Document 23 Filed 02/05/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

2

FEBRUARY 18, 2010. The hearing on defendant’s motion for summary judgment will be held

on MARCH 4, 2010.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 5, 2010. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:09-cv-02538-WHA Document 23 Filed 02/05/10 Page 2 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CAPITAL TRUST, INC.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

WALTER R. LEMBI, et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 09-02492 JSW

ORDER DIRECTING PARTIES

TO SUBMIT FURTHER CASE

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

STATEMENT

The Court has received and considered the parties Joint Case Management Conference

Statement. The Court previously ordered the parties to submit proposed dates for trial and

pretrial if they were not able to resolve this matter. In their Joint Case Management Conference

statement, the parties acknowledge this Order yet fail to submit any proposed dates.

Accordingly, the parties are HEREBY ORDERED to submit a further case management

conference statement by no later than 10:00 a.m. on August 11, 2010, that sets forth specific

dates for a hearing on dispositive motions, a pretrial conference, and trial. 

This matter remains on calendar on August 13, 2010 at 1:30 p.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 9, 2010 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:09-cv-02492-JSW Document 79 Filed 08/09/10 Page 1 of 1
### §912. Disposition of abandoned or forfeited railroad grants

Whenever public lands of the United States have been or may be granted to any railroad company for use as a right of way for its railroad or as sites for railroad structures of any kind, and use and occupancy of said lands for such purposes has ceased or shall hereafter cease, whether by forfeiture or by abandonment by said railroad company declared or decreed by a court of competent jurisdiction or by Act of Congress, then and thereupon all right, title, interest, and estate of the United States in said lands shall, except such part thereof as may be embraced in a public highway legally established within one year after the date of said decree or forfeiture or abandonment be transferred to and vested in any person, firm, or corporation, assigns, or successors in title and interest to whom or to which title of the United States may have been or may be granted, conveying or purporting to convey the whole of the legal subdivision or subdivisions traversed or occupied by such railroad or railroad structures of any kind as aforesaid, except lands within a municipality the title to which, upon forfeiture or abandonment, as herein provided, shall vest in such municipality, and this by virtue of the patent thereto and without the necessity of any other or further conveyance or assurance of any kind or nature whatsoever: Provided, That this section shall not affect conveyances made by any railroad company of portions of its right of way if such conveyance be among those which have been or may after March 8, 1922, and before such forfeiture or abandonment be validated and confirmed by any Act of Congress; nor shall this section affect any public highway on said right of way on March 8, 1922: Provided further, That the transfer of such lands shall be subject to and contain reservations in favor of the United States of all oil, gas, and other minerals in the land so transferred and conveyed, with the right to prospect for, mine, and remove same.

(Mar. 8, 1922, ch. 94, 42 Stat. 414.)
### Part B—Other Matters Relating to Sale
<PAGE>









                                   EXHIBIT 32

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

<PAGE>

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


Donald S. Hom, President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of
Lincoln Park Bancorp (the "Company"), certifies in his capacity as an officer of
the Company that he has reviewed the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-KSB
for the year ended December 31, 2005 and that to the best of his knowledge:

        1.      the report fully complies with the requirements of Sections
                13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

        2.      the information contained in the report fairly presents, in all
                material respects, the financial condition and results of
                operations of the Company.

The purpose of this statement is solely to comply with Title 18, Chapter 63,
Section 1350 of the United States Code, as amended by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.


March 30, 2006                     /s/ Donald S. Hom
Date                               -----------------------------------
                                   Donald S. Hom
                                   President, Chief Executive Officer  and Chief
                                   Financial Officer
Editorial Note on Part 200
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 200 appear at 69 FR 18803, Apr. 9, 2004.

§ 200.41 Maximum mortgagee fees and charges. ( a ) Mortgagee fees and charges included in the mortgage must be for actual required services provided to the mortgagor by the mortgagee, and shall not exceed common market rates for such services as determined by the Commissioner.
( b ) Mortgagee charges for prepayment of the mortgage and late mortgage payments shall not exceed that determined appropriate by the Commissioner.
§ 14.215 When an application may be filed. ( a ) An application may be filed whenever the applicant has prevailed in the proceeding or in a significant and discrete substantive portion of the proceeding, but in no case later than 30 days after the Department's final disposition of the proceeding.
( b ) For purposes of this rule, final disposition means the date on which a decision or order disposing of the merits of the proceeding or any other complete resolution of the proceeding, such as a settlement of voluntary dismissal, become final and unappealable, both within the Department and to the courts.
( c ) If review or reconsideration (under HUD Board of Contract Appeals Rule 29, 24 CFR 20.10) is sought or taken of a decision as to which an applicant believes it has prevailed, proceedings for the award of fees shall be stayed pending final disposition of the underlying controversy. When the United States appeals the underlying merits of an adversary adjudication to a court, no decision on an application for fees and other expenses in connection with that adversary adjudication shall be made until a final and unreviewable decision is rendered by the court on the appeal or until the underlying merits of the case have been finally determined pursuant to the appeal.