alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §§131 to 146. Repealed. May 20, 1926, ch. 347, §14, 44 Stat. 587

Section 131, act Feb. 28, 1920, ch. 91, §300, 41 Stat. 469, defined terms for purposes of this chapter. See section 151 et seq. of this title.

Section 132, act Feb. 28, 1920, ch. 91, §301, 41 Stat. 469, related to disputes between carriers and their officers, agents, and employees. See section 151 et seq. of this title.

Section 133, act Feb. 28, 1920, ch. 91, §302, 41 Stat. 469, related to establishment of railroad boards of labor adjustment. See section 151 et seq. of this title.

Section 134, act Feb. 28, 1920, ch. 91, §303, 41 Stat. 469, related to duty of boards to hear and decide disputes. See section 151 et seq. of this title.

Section 135, act Feb. 28, 1920, ch. 91, §304, 41 Stat. 470, related to establishment and composition of Railroad Labor Board. See section 151 et seq. of this title.

Section 136, act Feb. 28, 1920, ch. 91, §305, 41 Stat. 470, related to selection of members of board by President. See section 151 et seq. of this title.

Section 137, act Feb. 28, 1920, ch. 91, §306, 41 Stat. 470, related to effect of subsequent ineligibility of certain members. See section 151 et seq. of this title.

Section 138, act Feb. 28, 1920, ch. 91, §306, 41 Stat. 470, related to terms of office, salary, and removal from office of board members. See section 151 et seq. of this title.

Section 139, act Feb. 28, 1920, ch. 91, §307, 41 Stat. 470, related to disputes within jurisdiction of board. See section 151 et seq. of this title.

Section 140, act Feb. 28, 1920, ch. 91, §308, 41 Stat. 472, related to certain powers and duties of board. See section 151 et seq. of this title.

Section 141, act Feb. 28, 1920, ch. 91, §309, 41 Stat. 472, related to right to hearing by a party in dispute. See section 151 et seq. of this title.

Section 142, act Feb. 28, 1920, ch. 91, §310, 41 Stat. 472, related to certain procedural powers of board. See section 151 et seq. of this title.

Section 143, act Feb. 28, 1920, ch. 91, §311, 41 Stat. 472, related to access to books, accounts, and records. See section 151 et seq. of this title.

Section 144, act Feb. 28, 1920, ch. 91, §313, 41 Stat. 473, related to determination of violations of decisions of board. See section 151 et seq. of this title.

Section 145, act Feb. 28, 1920, ch. 91, §314, 41 Stat. 473, related to appointment and salary of Secretary of Board. See section 151 et seq. of this title.

Section 146, act Feb. 28, 1920, ch. 91, §316, 41 Stat. 474, related to jurisdiction of adjustment or labor board as excluding mediation board. See section 151 et seq. of this title.
#### NELSON et al., Appellants, v. SOUTHARD et al., Respondents.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

January 27, 1905.)

Action by Zachariah O. Nelson and Walter H. Nelson against Austin J. Southard and J. Milton Southard. No opinion. Interlocutory judgment affirmed, with costs.
§ 570.484 Overall benefit to low and moderate income persons. ( a ) *General.* The State must certify that, in the aggregate, not less than 70 percent of the CDBG funds received by the state during a period specified by the state, not to exceed three years, will be used for activities that benefit persons of low and moderate income. The period selected and certified to by the state shall be designated by fiscal year of annual grants, and shall be for one, two or three consecutive annual grants. The period shall be in effect until all included funds are expended. No CDBG funds may be included in more than one period selected, and all CDBG funds received must be included in a selected period.
( b ) *Computation of 70 percent benefit.* Determination that a state has carried out its certification under paragraph (a) of this section requires evidence that not less than 70 percent of the aggregate of the designated annual grant(s), any funds reallocated by HUD to the state, any distributed program income and any guaranteed loan funds under the provisions of subpart M of this part covered in the method of distribution in the final statement or statements for the designated annual grant year or years have been expended for activities meeting criteria as provided in § 570.483(b) for activities benefiting low and moderate income persons. In calculating the percentage of funds expended for such activities: ( 1 ) All CDBG funds included in the period selected and certified to by the state shall be accounted for, except for funds used by the State, or by the units of general local government, for program administration, or for planning activities other than those which must meet a national objective under § 570.483 (b)(5) or (c)(3).
( 2 ) Any funds expended by a state for the purpose of repayment of loans guaranteed under the provisions of subpart M of this part shall be excepted from inclusion in this calculation.
( 3 ) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(4) of this section, CDBG funds expended for an eligible activity meeting the criteria for activities benefiting low and moderate income persons shall count in their entirety towards meeting the 70 percent benefit to persons of low and moderate income requirement.
( 4 ) Funds expended for the acquisition, new construction or rehabilitation of property for housing that qualifies under § 570.483(b)(3) shall be counted for this purpose, but shall be limited to an amount determined by multiplying the total cost (including CDBG and non-CDBG costs) of the acquisition, construction or rehabilitation by the percent of units in such housing to be occupied by low and moderate income persons, except that the amount counted shall not exceed the amount of CDBG funds provided.
§ 582.120 Consolidated plan. ( a ) *Applicants that are States or units of general local government.* The applicant must have a HUD-approved complete or abbreviated consolidated plan, in accordance with 24 CFR part 91, and must submit a certification that the application for funding is consistent with the HUD-approved consolidated plan. Funded applicants must certify in a grant agreement that they are following the HUD-approved consolidated plan. If the applicant is a State, and the project will be located in a unit of general local government that is required to have, or has, a complete consolidated plan, or that is applying for Shelter Plus Care assistance under the same Notice of Fund Availability (NOFA) and will have an abbreviated consolidated plan with respect to that application, the State also must submit a certification by the unit of general local government that the State's application is consistent with the unit of general local government's HUD-approved consolidated plan.
( b ) *Applicants that are not States or units of general local government.* The applicant must submit a certification by the jurisdiction in which the proposed project will be located that the jurisdiction is following its HUD-approved consolidated plan and the applicant's application for funding is consistent with the jurisdiction's HUD-approved consolidated plan. The certification must be made by the unit of general local government or the State, in accordance with the consistency certification provisions of the consolidated plan regulations, 24 CFR part 91, subpart F.
( c ) *Indian tribes and the Insular Areas of Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands.* These entities are not required to have a consolidated plan or to make consolidated plan certifications. An application by an Indian tribe or other applicant for a project that will be located on a reservation of an Indian tribe will not require a certification by the tribe or the State. However, where an Indian tribe is the applicant for a project that will not be located on a reservation, the requirement for a certification under paragraph (b) of this section will apply.
( d ) *Timing of consolidated plan certification submissions.* Unless otherwise set forth in the NOFA, the required certification that the application for funding is consistent with the HUD-approved consolidated plan must be submitted by the funding application submission deadline announced in the NOFA.
[60 FR 16379, Mar. 30, 1995]
### §3308. Examinations

In addition to inspections required by section 3307 of this title, the Secretary shall examine or have examined—

(1) each vessel subject to inspection at proper times to ensure compliance with law and regulations; and

(2) crewmember accommodations on each vessel subject to inspection at least once a month or when the vessel enters United States ports to ensure that the accommodations are—

(A) of the size required by law and regulations;

(B) properly ventilated and in a clean and sanitary condition; and

(C) equipped with proper plumbing and mechanical appliances required by law and regulations, and the appliances are in good working condition.

(Pub. L. 98–89, Aug. 26, 1983, 97 Stat. 514; Pub. L. 104–324, title VI, §603(c), Oct. 19, 1996, 110 Stat. 3930.)

| Revised section | Source section (U.S. Code) |
| --- | --- |
| 3308 | 46:43546:660a46:660b |

46:660a

46:660b

Section 3308 requires the Secretary to carry out additional inspections as might be necessary to ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations, and to ensure that accommodations are maintained in a sanitary condition and that all appliances are in good working order.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1996—Pub. L. 104–324 inserted "or have examined" after "examine" in introductory provisions.

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective Apr. 15, 1984, see section 2(g)(1) of Pub. L. 98–89, set out as a note under section 3101 of this title.
### §962. Right of way in Colorado and Wyoming to pipeline companies

The right of way through the public lands of the United States situate in the State of Colorado and in the State of Wyoming outside of the boundary lines of the Yellowstone National Park is granted to any pipe-line company or corporation formed for the purpose of transporting oils, crude or refined, which shall have filed or may hereafter file with the Secretary of the Interior a copy of its articles of incorporation, and due proofs of its organization under the same, to the extent of the ground occupied by said pipe line and twenty-five feet on each side of the center line of the same; also the right to take from the public lands adjacent to the line of said pipe line, material, earth, and stone necessary for the construction of said pipe line.

(May 21, 1896, ch. 212, §1, 29 Stat. 127.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Short Title

Sections 962 to 965 of this title are popularly known as the "Oil Pipe Line Act".

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

#### Repeal; Savings Provision

Section repealed by Pub. L. 94–579, title VII, §706(a), Oct. 21, 1976, 90 Stat. 2793, effective on and after Oct. 21, 1976, insofar as applicable to the issuance of rights-of-way over, upon, under, and through the public lands and lands in the National Forest System. Such repeal not to be construed as terminating any valid lease, permit, patent, etc., existing on Oct. 21, 1976, see section 701 of Pub. L. 94–579, set out as a note under section 1701 of this title.
EX-10.5


   

  FIRST AMENDMENT

  TO THE CUSTODY AGREEMENT

   

  THIS FIRST AMENDMENT effective as of the last date on the signature block, to the Custody Agreement (the “Agreement”) dated as of December 9, 2021, is entered into by and between MSD INVESTMENT CORP (f/k/a MSD Investment, LLC), a Maryland corporation (the “Company”), and U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, a national banking association organized and existing under the laws of the United States of America with its principal place of business at Minneapolis, Minnesota (the “Custodian”).

  RECITALS

   

  WHEREAS, the parties have entered into the Agreement; and

   

  WHEREAS, the parties desire to update the Company’s legal name from MSD Investment, LLC to MSD Investment Corp; and 

   

  WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Agreement to update the fees; and

   

  WHEREAS, Section 18.1 of the Agreement allows for its amendment by a written instrument executed by both parties.

   

  NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:

   

  1.The company has updated its legal name from MSD Investment, LLC to MSD Investment Corp.


   

  2.Section 8.1 of the Agreement is hereby superseded and replaced in its entirety with the following:


   

  8.1	Fees.  The Custodian and the Document Custodian shall be entitled to compensation for their services in accordance with of that certain fee letter dated December 8, 2021, among the Company, the Custodian and the Document Custodian and as it relates to collateral segregation services in accordance with Exhibit B attached hereto.

   

  3.Except to the extent amended hereby, the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.


   

   

   

   

   

   

   

  SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE

   

   

   

   

   

  1

   

  

   

   

   

  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Thirteenth Amendment to be executed by a duly authorized officer on one or more counterparts as of the date and year last written below.

   

  U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION 

  		
	By:
	/s/ Greg Farley

	Name:
	Greg Farley

	Title:
	SVP

	Date:
	11/11/2022



   

  MSD INVESTMENT CORP

  		
	By:
	/s/ Brian S. Williams

	Name:
	Brian S. Williams

	Title:
	CFO and Treasurer

	Date:
	11/11/2022
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE COMPANY AS OF AND FOR THE THREE MONTHS
ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         762,178
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,144,372
<ALLOWANCES>                                    12,500
<INVENTORY>                                  1,704,648
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,659,460
<PP&E>                                          90,693
<DEPRECIATION>                                  12,894
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,747,680
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          432,297
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     4,328,406
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,013,023)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,747,680
<SALES>                                      1,283,527
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,283,527
<CGS>                                        1,029,555
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,029,555
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               385,755
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 6,500
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             551,509
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (689,792)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (689,792)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.26)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.26)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 99.3


                 INTERSTAR SECURITISATION MANAGEMENT PTY LIMITED
                       OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

The undersigned  officer of Interstar  Securitisation  Management Pty Limited, a
company  organized  under  the  laws  of  Victoria,  Australia  ("ISM"),  hereby
certifies on behalf of ISM and on his own behalf for  purposes of the  Interstar
Millennium  Series  2004-2G Trust Class A, Class AB and Class B Mortgage  Backed
Floating Rate Notes (the "Notes"), as follows:

1.   I am a duly appointed, qualified and acting Officer of ISM,

2.   I am duly  authorized to execute and deliver this Officer's  Certificate on
     behalf of ISM; and

3.   To the best of my  knowledge,  the Issuer  Trustee  has  complied  with all
     conditions and covenants under the Transaction Documents, for the Interstar
     Millennium  Series  2004-2G issue of Notes for the period between March 11,
     2004,  the date on which the Trust issued Notes,  to the end of the Trust's
     fiscal year on December 31, 2004

     Capitalized  terms used and not  defined  herein  shall  have the  meanings
     assigned   to  such  terms  in  the  Note   Trust   Deed   related  to  the
     above-referenced issue of Notes.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed my name as of March 24, 2005.



/s/ Sam Kyriacou
-------------------------------------------
Name:    Sam Kyriacou
Title:   Director, Interstar Securitisation
         Management Pty Limited
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-41379

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JUAN ALBERTO VARGAS-GONZALEZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:12-CR-1150-1

Before JOLLY, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Juan Alberto VargasGonzalez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance

with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632

F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Vargas-Gonzalez has not filed a response. We have

reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. 

We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous

issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 25, 2013

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

 Case: 12-41379 Document: 00512420097 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/25/2013
No. 12-41379

is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2

 Case: 12-41379 Document: 00512420097 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/25/2013
§ 401.400 Required elements of a Restructuring Plan. ( a ) *General.* A PAE is responsible for the development of a Restructuring Plan for each project included in its PRA.
( b ) *Required elements.* The Restructuring Plan must contain a narrative that fully describes the restructuring transaction. The Restructuring Plan must include the elements required by section 514(e) of MAHRA. The Restructuring Plan must describe the use of any restructuring tools listed at sections 517(a) and (b) of MAHRA, and must contain other requirements as determined by HUD.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3238 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3238

        To extend the temporary suspension of duty on isoxaben.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 12, 2005

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
        To extend the temporary suspension of duty on isoxaben.

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

SECTION 1. ISOXABEN.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.02.96 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to N-[3-(1-ethyl-1-
methylpropyl)-5-isoxazolyl]-2,6-dimethoxybenzamide (isoxaben)) is 
amended by striking ``12/31/2006'' and inserting ``12/31/2008''.
    (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>
```
#### The People of the State of Illinois ex rel. Edward H. Frank et al., appellees, v. Joseph P. Streuber, State’s Attorney of Madison County, Illinois, appellant.

Mandamus to compel State’s Attorney of Madison County to file petition of *quo warranto*to test right of holders to certain offices in City of Edwardsville. Peremptory writ awarded. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Madison county; the Hon. George A. Crow, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1923.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed July 2, 1923.

Rehearing denied October 23, 1923.

J. F. Beck, Wm. M. P. Smith and Joseph P. Streuber, for appellant.

Terry, Gueltig & Powell, for appellees.

Mr. Presiding Justice Boggs

delivered the opinion of the court.
IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2023 ND 193

State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee

v.

Lawrence Alexander Harris, Defendant and Appellant

No. 20230033

Appeal from the District Court of Burleigh County, South Central Judicial 

District, the Honorable Bruce A. Romanick, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Dennis H. Ingold, Assistant State’s Attorney, Bismarck, ND, for plaintiff and 

appellee.

Kiara C. Kraus-Parr, Grand Forks, ND, for defendant and appellant. 

FILED 

IN THE OFFICE OF THE 

CLERK OF SUPREME COURT 

OCTOBER 11, 2023 

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
1

State v. Harris

No. 20230033

Per Curiam.

[¶1] Lawrence Alexander Harris appeals from a criminal judgment and a

district court order denying his motion to suppress evidence. On appeal, Harris 

argues the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence from 

the traffic stop of the vehicle in which he was a passenger because the officers 

did not have reasonable and articulable suspicion to conduct the stop. We 

conclude the district court did not err in denying Harris’ motion to suppress

because there was reasonable and articulable suspicion to stop the vehicle.

[¶2] While not argued in the district court, Harris also argues on appeal there 

was no reasonable and articulable basis to detain him following the stop of the 

vehicle. We decline to address this argument. State v. Dockter, 2019 ND 203, 

¶ 8, 932 N.W.2d 98 (issues not raised or considered in the district court will not 

be addressed on appeal). We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2)

and (7).

[¶3] Jon J. Jensen, C.J.

Daniel J. Crothers

Lisa Fair McEvers

Jerod E. Tufte

Douglas A. Bahr