alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §225. Bond to deliver cargo at destination named in clearance

Whenever a permit or clearance is granted for either a foreign or domestic port, it shall be lawful for the collector of the customs granting the same, if he deems it necessary, under the circumstances of the case, to require a bond to be executed by the master or the owner of the vessel, in a penalty equal to the value of the cargo, and with sureties to the satisfaction of such collector, that the cargo shall be delivered at the destination for which it is cleared or permitted, and that no part thereof shall be used in affording aid or comfort to any person or parties in insurrection against the authority of the United States.

(R.S. §5321.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

R.S. §5321 derived from act May 20, 1862, ch. 81, §2, 12 Stat. 404.

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

All offices of collector of customs, comptroller of customs, surveyor of customs, and appraiser of merchandise of Bureau of Customs of Department of the Treasury to which appointments were required to be made by President with advice and consent of Senate ordered abolished, with such offices to be terminated not later than December 31, 1966, by Reorg. Plan No. 1, of 1965, eff. May 25, 1965, 30 F.R. 7035, 79 Stat. 1317, set out in the Appendix to Title 5, Government Organization and Employees. All functions of offices eliminated were already vested in Secretary of the Treasury by Reorg. Plan No. 26 of 1950, eff. July 31, 1950, 15 F.R. 4935, 64 Stat. 1280, set out in the Appendix to Title 5.
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement of
Encore Computer Corporation on Forms S-8 (Registration Statement Nos.
33-10225, 33-33907, 33-34171, 33-72458 and 33-72741) and on Forms S-3
(Registration Statement Nos. 33-121, 33-33907 and 33-34171) of our reports
dated January 30, 1997 except for Note M as to which the date is March 19,
1997, on our audits of the consolidated financial statements and financial
statement schedule of Encore Computer Corporation as of December 31, 1996
and 1995 and for the years ended December 31, 1996, 1995 and 1994, which
report is included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.



COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.

Miami, Florida
April 15, 1997
### §3997. Distribution of information concerning benefits of subchapter

#### (a) Distribution of information by Secretary concerned

The Secretary concerned shall issue to servicemembers information explaining the provisions of this subchapter.

#### (b) Application forms

The Secretary concerned shall provide application forms to servicemembers requesting relief under this subchapter.

#### (c) Information from Secretary of the Interior

The Secretary of the Interior shall furnish to the Secretary concerned information explaining the provisions of this subchapter (other than sections 3991, 4000, and 4001 of this title) and related application forms.

(Oct. 17, 1940, ch. 888, title V, §507, as added Pub. L. 108–189, §1, Dec. 19, 2003, 117 Stat. 2857.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 567 of the former Appendix to this title prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 507 of act Oct. 17, 1940, ch. 888, art. V, 54 Stat. 1188; Pub. L. 102–12, §9(22), Mar. 18, 1991, 105 Stat. 41, related to right to take action for perfection and defense of rights as unaffected, and affidavits and proofs, prior to the general amendment of this Act by Pub. L. 108–189. See section 3996 of this title.

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

#### Effective Date

Section applicable to any case not final before Dec. 19, 2003, see section 3 of Pub. L. 108–189, set out as a note under section 3901 of this title.
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

In re Ruby Britt

No. 06

- 16

- 00074

- CV Original Mandamus Proceeding

Opinion delivered by Justice Moseley, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice Burgess participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find that Relator’s petition for writ of

mandamus should be conditionally granted. For the reasons described hereinabove, we
conditionally grant the writ of mandamus and direct the 62nd Judicial District Court to vacate its

or der granting a new trial and to reinstate the default judgment. The writ will issue only if the trial
court fails to comply.

RENDERED NOVEMBER 29, 2016

BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
Editorial Note on Part 75
Editorial Note: The provisions of this part marked [Statutory Provision] appear in Title III of the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969.

§ 75.205 Installation of roof support using mining machines with integral roof bolters. When roof bolts are installed by a continuous mining machine with integral roof bolting equipment: ( a ) The distance between roof bolts shall not exceed 10 feet crosswise.
( b ) Roof bolts to be installed 9 feet or more apart shall be installed with a wooden crossbar at least 3 inches thick and 8 inches wide, or material which provides equivalent support.
( c ) Roof bolts to be installed more than 8 feet but less than 9 feet apart shall be installed with a wooden plank at least 2 inches thick and 8 inches wide, or material which provides equivalent support.
### §1508. Publication in Federal Register as notice of hearing

A notice of hearing or of opportunity to be heard, required or authorized to be given by an Act of Congress, or which may otherwise properly be given, shall be deemed to have been given to all persons residing within the States of the Union and the District of Columbia, except in cases where notice by publication is insufficient in law, when the notice is published in the Federal Register at such a time that the period between the publication and the date fixed in the notice for the hearing or for the termination of the opportunity to be heard is—

(1) not less than the time specifically prescribed for the publication of the notice by the appropriate Act of Congress; or

(2) not less than fifteen days when time for publication is not specifically prescribed by the Act, without prejudice, however, to the effectiveness of a notice of less than fifteen days where the shorter period is reasonable.

(Pub. L. 90–620, Oct. 22, 1968, 82 Stat. 1276.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on 44 U.S. Code, 1964 ed., §308 (July 26, 1935, ch. 417, §8, 49 Stat. 502; June 25, 1959, Pub. L. 86–70, §34, 73 Stat. 149; July 12, 1960, Pub. L. 86–624, §33, 74 Stat. 421).
§ 585.222 What other auction rules must bidders follow? ( a ) Bidders must submit a deposit to participate in an auction under § 585.501(a), unless otherwise specified in the FSN. A provisional winner's bid deposit will be credited toward the balance due on its bid.
( b ) Only bidders qualified by BOEM under §§ 585.107 and 585.108 are permitted to bid during an auction.
( c ) Only an authorized agent may act on a bidder's behalf during an auction. Bidders must submit the names of their authorized agents to BOEM before the auction, as prescribed in the FSN.
( d ) Each bidder must follow the auction process specified in the FSN and may not take any action to disrupt or alter the process beyond its intended function.
( e ) A bidder is responsible for immediately contacting BOEM if it is unable to submit its bid for any reason during an auction. If a bidder fails to timely notify BOEM of its inability to bid, it may not dispute the auction or lease award on that basis. If a bidder timely notifies BOEM of its inability to submit a bid, BOEM, in its discretion, may suspend the auction, continue the auction using an alternative method, or continue the auction without the participation of the affected bidder.
#### § 57.7013 Covering or guarding drill holes.

Drill holes large enough to constitute a hazard shall be covered or guarded.
§ 585.652 How long do I have to conduct activities under an approved GAP? After BOEM approves your GAP, you have: ( a ) For a limited lease, the time period established under § 585.236(a)(2), unless we renew the operations period under §§ 585.425 through 585.429.
( b ) For a ROW grant or RUE grant, the time provided in the terms of the grant.
§ 560.100 Authority. ( a ) The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) (43 U.S.C. 1334) (“Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act Amendments of 1978”).
( b ) The Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act, as amended (FOGRMA) (30 U.S.C. 1711), including the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Simplification and Fairness Act of 1996, (30 U.S.C. 1701 note).
( c ) The Independent Offices Appropriations Act of 1952 (31 U.S.C. 9701).
( d ) Public Law 89-554, 1966 (5 U.S.C. 301).
[81 FR 18175, Mar. 30, 2016]
Exhibit 31.4

Certifications

I, William F. Gifford, Jr.,
certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this amendment no. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K of Altria Group, Inc.;
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such
statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; and
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|3. | Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: July 1, 2015



/s/ WILLIAM F. GIFFORD, JR.William F. Gifford, Jr.Executive Vice President andChief Financial Officer
§ 721.12 Right of entry. ( a ) Authorized representatives of the Secretary, without advance notice and upon presentation of appropriate credentials and without a search warrant, shall have the right of entry to, upon, or through any surface coal mining and reclamation operations or any premises in which any records required to be maintained are located.
( b ) The authorized representatives may at reasonable times, and without delay, have access to and copy any records, and inspect any monitoring equipment or method of operation required under this Act, the regulations or the permit.
§ 722.17 Inability to comply. ( a ) Neither a notice of violation nor a cessation order issued under this part may be vacated because of inability to comply.
( b ) A permittee may not be deemed to have shown good cause for not suspending or revoking a permit by showing inability to comply.
( c ) Unless caused by lack of diligence, inability to comply may be considered in mitigation of the amount of a civil penalty under part 723 of this chapter and of the duration of the suspension of the permit under § 722.16 of this part.
Exhibit
      18.1




March
      31,
      2008





Board
      of
      Directors


Simclar,
      Inc.





As
      stated
      in notes to the consolidated financial statements of Simclar, Inc. and
      subsidiaries (the "Company") for the year ended December 31, 2007, the Company
      changed the reporting unit for goodwill impairment testing purposes and changed
      the date of its annual goodwill impairment test from various dates throughout
      the year to the first day following the end of their 3 rd quarter.
      Management believes that the accounting change is preferable in the
      circumstances because it better aligns management’s consideration of the
      operations of the Company and also better aligns the timing of the Company’s
      long-range planning with this test, as the impairment test is dependent on
      the
      results of the Company’s long-range planning process. At your request, we have
      reviewed and discussed with management the circumstances, business judgment,
      and
      planning that formed the basis for making this change in accounting
      principle.





It
      should
      be recognized that professional standards have not been established for
      selecting among alternative principles that exist in this area or for evaluating
      the preferability of alternative accounting principles. Accordingly, we are
      furnishing this letter solely for purposes of the Company's compliance with
      the
      requirements of the Securities and Exchange Commission, and it should not be
      used or relied on for any other purpose.





Based
      on
      our review and discussion, we concur with management's judgment that the newly
      adopted accounting principle is preferable in the circumstances. In formulating
      this position, we are relying on management's business planning and judgment,
      which we do not find unreasonable.





Very
      truly yours,





/S/
      GRANT
      THORNTON LLP
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

Nos. DA 22-0211

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

BRANDEN CONRAD MIESMER,

Defendant and Appellant.

_______________________________________________________________

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing, I

T IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including October 30, 2023, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

September 8 2023

09/08/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0211
### §2791b. Charges to individual program, project, or activity

Of the funds authorized by the Secretary of Energy for laboratory directed research and development, no individual program, project, or activity funded by this or any subsequent Act making appropriations for Energy and Water Development for any fiscal year may be charged more than the statutory maximum authorized for such activities: Provided, That this section shall take effect not earlier than October 1, 2015.

(Pub. L. 113–235, div. D, title III, §311, Dec. 16, 2014, 128 Stat. 2326.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This Act, referred to in text, is div. D of Pub. L. 113–235, Dec. 16, 2014, 128 Stat. 2303, known as the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Tables.

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015, and also as part of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015, and not as part of the Atomic Energy Defense Act which comprises this chapter.
### §4140. Claim filing period

Within sixty days after the enactment of this subchapter or of legislation making appropriations to the Commission for payment of administrative expenses incurred in carrying out its functions under this subchapter, whichever date is later, the Commission shall give public notice by publication in the Federal Register of the time when, and the limit of time within which claims may be filed, which limit shall not be more than eighteen months after such publication.

(July 3, 1948, ch. 826, title II, §210, as added Pub. L. 87–846, title I, §103, Oct. 22, 1962, 76 Stat. 1111.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The enactment of this subchapter, referred to in text, probably means the date of enactment of Pub. L. 87–846, which was approved Oct. 22, 1962.

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 2017i of the former Appendix to this title prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

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

#### Protests Relating to Awards by Commission; Notice by Publication in Federal Register

Notwithstanding the provisions of this section and section 4141 of this title, receipt and consideration of filed and published protests relating to awards made by the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission which result in modification of such awards shall be certified and paid by the Secretary of the Treasury out of the War Claims Fund in accordance with section 4143 of this title. See section 615 of act Mar. 10, 1950, ch. 54, as added by Pub. L. 94–542, Oct. 18, 1976, 90 Stat. 2512, set out as a note under section 1623 of Title 22, Foreign Relations and Intercourse.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATON EXTRACTED FROM THE DTE ENERGY
COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME, BALANCE
SHEET, STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS, STATEMENT OF COMMON SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY AND
PRIMARY AND FULLY DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE OF COMMON STOCK AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000936340
<NAME> DTE
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                    8,451,303
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                    595,562
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         909,473
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                     1,096,757
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              11,053,095
<COMMON>                                     1,951,193
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                            0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                          1,488,360
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>               3,439,553
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    144,405
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                         3,740,734
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                   0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                   4,000
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                  144,214
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                    145,508
<LEASES-CURRENT>                               144,644
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>               3,290,037
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>               11,053,095
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      868,604
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            54,391
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     665,770
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     720,161
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                        148,443
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                             (3,436)
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                 145,007
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        71,100
<NET-INCOME>                                    71,000
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                      2,907
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                        0
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        74,728
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                       67,566
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                         234,856
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .49
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .49
        

</TABLE>
Devany,· Dennis (OST) 

from: .. _"'.. slevaque84@verizon.net 

~;Sellt: . . Monday, February 15, 2010 9:35 AM , A'" 'To:",~'::~:,. Devany, Dennis (OST) 

Cc: Swansqn, Brian (OST) 

SLLblEt9: Colgan& CapeAir decision, Plattsburgh ., «\'\'1' , "':\'t 

High 

DearSir, 

I am deeply concerned by the Clinton County legislators choice to recommend Colgan Air as the Essential AirService 

provider for CUnton County. I strongly disagree with this decision, but believe that going through normal channels - Le. my 

county legislators - my objections, and the objections of other North Country residents will be ignored. For the following 

reasons I oppose making Colgan Air the EAS provider for Plattsburgh International Airport: 

1. I question.whether Plattsburgh needs EAS service at all. Plattsburgh is under an hQur's drive from Burlington 


Internptionql Airport in Burlington, Vermont, which offers service to many destinations, either directly or through 


connections on other airlines. 


2. It is my understanding that EAS funds .are supposed to subsidize an airport that serves the needs of the immediate 

community. This is not the case in Plattsburgh, NY! Read our local newspaper and you will see that the airport is being 

touted by county legislators as a wonderful business venture that lures Canadians who want to fly south cheaply. I do not 

see any mention in U.S.C. 4173 - 4178 that EAS funding was intended to subsidize travel by foreign nationals. 

3. Cape Air has provided reliable and suitable service to Clinton County since the opening of Plattsburgh International 

Airport. County legislators suggested that offering flights on larger planes - hence the decision to vote for Colgan as the 

new EAS provider - would entice more people to fly out of Plattsburgh. Cape Air has stated for the record that they do not 

fill all the seats on their flights. The county councilors were resolute in their decision to choose Colgan over Cape Air, 

. however, and cited the results of a survey conducted by the local Chamber of Commerce. 	 The survey asked Montreal 

residents if they would be more likely to us Plattsburgh International Airport if it were serviced by larger aircraft. 

4. Colgan Air was the focus of anNTSB investigation surrounding the crash of Flight 3407 that killed 50 people. A PBS 


Frontline documentary, aired on Feb. 9, presented evidence that Colgan operates using a shoddy business model that 


ultimatel~(led to the fateful accident. 


I strongly recommend that the DOT look into local decisions being made concerning Plattsburgh International Airport .. I 

think it is time that someone in a position ofauthority review our situation and take a greater interest, and possibly role, in 

the decisions being made. . . 

Sincerely, 


Susan Levaque 


slevague84@verizon.net