alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 934.10 State program approval. The North Dakota State Program, as submitted on February 29, 1980, and amended and clarified on June 12, 1980 and September 9, 1980, is conditionally approved, effective December 15, 1980. Beginning on that date, PSC shall be deemed the regulatory authority in North Dakota for all surface coal mining and reclamation operations and for all exploration operations where more than 250 tons of coal are removed on non-Federal and non-Indian lands and the North Dakota Geological Survey shall be deemed the regulatory authority in North Dakota for all exploration operations where less than 250 tons of coal are removed on non-Federal and non-Indian lands. Only surface mining and reclamation operations on non-Federal and non-Indian lands shall be subject to the provisions of the North Dakota permanent regulatory program. Copies of the approved program, together with copies of the letter of the Public Service Commission agreeing to the conditions in § 934.11, are available at: ( a ) North Dakota Public Service Commission, Reclamation Division; State Capitol Building; Bismarck, ND 58505-0165; Telephone: (701) 224-4096.
( b ) Office of Surface Mining, 100 East “B” Street, Casper, Wyoming 82601-1918, telephone: (307) 261-5824.
[45 FR 82246, Dec. 15, 1980, as amended at 57 FR 826, Jan. 9, 1992; 57 FR 37706, Aug. 20, 1992]
**THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS**

**Post Office Box 12248**

**Austin, Texas 78711**

**(512) 463-1312**

October 27, 2006

Ms. Patricia J. Kerrigan

Werner & Kerrigan, L.L.P.

2000 West Loop South, Suite 1550

Houston, TX 77027

Mr. Francisco J. Rodriguez

Rodriguez Tovar & De Los Santos, LLP

1111 West Nolana

McAllen, TX 78504-3747

Mr. Sean F. O'Neill

Law Offices of Sean F. O'Neill

888 Isom, Suite 100 

San Antonio, TX 78216

Honorable Aida Salinas Flores

398th District Court

100 N. Closner, 2nd Floor

Edinburg, TX 78539

Mr. Kevin M. Beiter

Hornberger Sheehan Fuller & Beiter, Inc.

7373 Broadway, Suite 300

San Antonio, TX 78209

RE:Case Number:  05-0479

Court of Appeals Number:  13-05-00331-CV

Trial Court Number:  C-1566-03-I

Style:IN RE  GRACO CHILDREN'S PRODUCTS, INC. AND NEWELL RUBBERMAID, INC.

Dear Counsel:

Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.8(c), without hearing oral argument, the Court conditionally grants the petition for writ of mandamus and issued the enclosed per curiam opinion in the above-referenced cause.  The stay issued July 14, 2005 is lifted.

Sincerely,

Blake A. Hawthorne, Clerk

by Claudia Jenks, Chief Deputy Clerk

Enclosure

**Case No. 05-0479Page 2**
§ 90.301 Respirable dust control plan; approval by District Manager; copy to part 90 miner. Cross Reference
Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 28485 , Apr. 18, 2024.
The following is required until April 14, 2025: ( a ) The District Manager will approve respirable dust control plans on a mine-by-mine basis. When approving respirable dust control plans, the District Manager shall consider whether: ( 1 ) The respirable dust control measures would be likely to maintain concentrations of respirable coal mine dust at or below the applicable standard; and
( 2 ) The operator's compliance with all provisions of the respirable dust control plan could be objectively ascertained by MSHA.
( b ) MSHA may take respirable dust samples to determine whether the respirable dust control measures in the operator's plan effectively maintain concentrations of respirable coal mine dust at or below the applicable standard.
( c ) The operator shall comply with all provisions of each respirable dust control plan upon notice from MSHA that the respirable dust control plan is approved.
( d ) The operator shall provide a copy of the current respirable dust control plan required under this part to the part 90 miner. The operator shall not post the original or a copy of the plan on the mine bulletin board.
( e ) The operator may review respirable dust control plans and submit proposed revisions to such plans to the District Manager for approval.
[79 FR 24993, May 1, 2014, as amended at 89 FR 28485, Apr. 18, 2024]
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-60190

 

ANTONIO VIZCAINO-CHACON,

Petitioner,

versus

JOHN ASHCROFT, 

ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent.

--------------------

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A35-891-463

--------------------

March 7, 2002

Before REAVLEY, WIENER, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Antonio Vizcaino-Chacon petitions for review of an order of

the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) holding that VizcainoChacon’s state conviction for felony driving while intoxicated

was an aggravated felony warranting his removal from this

country. The respondent has moved to dismiss the petition for

review and to remand the case to the BIA for reconsideration in

light of United States v. Chapa-Garza, 243 F.3d 921, 927 (5th

Cir. 2001). Vizcaino-Chacon has not replied to the respondent’s

motion to remand. 
No. 01-60190

-2-

Vizcaino-Chacon’s petition for review is GRANTED. The order

of the BIA is VACATED, and this case is REMANDED to the BIA for

disposition consistent with Chapa-Garza, 243 F.3d at 927. All

other outstanding motions are DENIED.
#### § 875.20 Contractor eligibility.

Every successful bidder for any contract by an uncertified State or Indian tribe under this part, or for any contract by a certified State or Indian tribe to undertake a noncoal reclamation project under this part, must be eligible under §§ 773.12, 773.13, and 773.14 of this chapter at the time of contract award to receive a permit or be provisionally issued a permit to conduct surface coal mining operations. This section applies only to any contracts by a certified State or Indian tribe that are for coal reclamation or that are for a noncoal reclamation project under this part.

[80 FR 6446, Feb. 5, 2015]
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      Exhibit 23


                         Consent of Independent Auditors


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 33-59244) pertaining to the Security National Bank and Trust Company 401
(k) Profit Sharing Savings Plan and the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No.
33-80761) pertaining to the Security Banc Corporation 1995 Stock Option Plan of
our report dated January 10, 1999, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements of Security Banc Corporation incorporated by reference in the Annual
Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1998.


                                                   Ernst & Young LLP


Columbus, Ohio
March 25, 1999
#### Hudson Demolition Co., Inc., Appellant, v Ismor Realty Corp., Respondent.

In an action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien, plaintiff appeals from so much of a money judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered January 7, 1977, as, after a nonjury trial, denied foreclosure of the lien. Judgment affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs. In our view plaintiff-appellant’s notice of lien failed to comply with the requirements of subdivision 7 of section 9 of the Lien Law. The block and lot description placed within the notice of lien described an adjacent property. The fact that the face sheet of the notice of lien contained the proper address of the property on which plaintiff sought to place its lien does not make the lien valid and did not constitute substantial compliance with the statute. The face sheet was not an integral part of the notice of lien, and thus a party examining the pertinent part of the notice would not he able to identify the premises intended to he described with reasonable certainty, to the exclusion of all others (cf. *Hurley v Tucker,*128 App Div 580; *Roshirt, Inc. v Rosenstock,*138 Misc 515). Gulotta, J. P., Shapiro, Cohalan and O’Connor, JJ., concur.
#### Lester Liberman v. Valley Forge Flag Company, Inc., et al.

Motion to dismiss appeals granted, with $10 costs. Concur — Rabin, J. P., Valente, McNally, Stevens and Eager, JJ.
EXHIBIT 21


                             LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES

     The Partnership is a partner of the following joint ventures:
JMB/Piper Jaffray Tower Associates, an Illinois general partnership, which
is a partner in (i) OB Joint Venture II, a general partnership, which is a
partner in 222 South Ninth Street Limited Partnership, a limited partner-
ship, which holds title to the Piper Jaffray Tower office building in
Minneapolis, Minnesota, and (ii) OB Joint Venture, a general partnership,
which holds title to the land underlying the Piper Jaffray Tower office
building; JMB/Piper Jaffray Tower Associates II, a general partnership
which also is a partner in OB Joint Venture, a general partnership, which
holds title to the land underlying the Piper Jaffray Tower office building;
900 3rd Avenue Associates, an Illinois general partnership, which is a
partner of Progress Partners, a general partnership, which held title to
900 Third Avenue Building located in New York, New York; Maguire Thomas
Partners - South Tower, a limited liability company, which holds title to
Wells Fargo Center - South Tower located in Los Angeles, California.
Reference is made to the Notes for a description of the terms of such
venture partnerships.
### §21071. National Student and Parent Mock Election

#### (a) In general

The Election Assistance Commission is authorized to award grants to the National Student and Parent Mock Election, a national nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that works to promote voter participation in American elections to enable it to carry out voter education activities for students and their parents. Such activities may—

(1) include simulated national elections at least 5 days before the actual election that permit participation by students and parents from each of the 50 States in the United States, its territories, the District of Columbia, and United States schools overseas; and

(2) consist of—

(A) school forums and local cable call-in shows on the national issues to be voted upon in an "issues forum";

(B) speeches and debates before students and parents by local candidates or stand-ins for such candidates;

(C) quiz team competitions, mock press conferences, and speech writing competitions;

(D) weekly meetings to follow the course of the campaign; or

(E) school and neighborhood campaigns to increase voter turnout, including newsletters, posters, telephone chains, and transportation.

#### (b) Requirement

The National Student and Parent Mock Election shall present awards to outstanding student and parent mock election projects.

(Pub. L. 107–252, title II, §295, Oct. 29, 2002, 116 Stat. 1703.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 15471 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.
#### § 775.1 Scope and purpose.

This part provides requirements for administrative and judicial review of decisions on permits.
#### § 872.29 What are prior balance replacement funds?

“Prior balance replacement funds” are moneys we must distribute to you instead of the moneys we allocated to your State or Tribal share of the Fund before October 1, 2007, but did not distribute to you because Congress did not appropriate them. They come from general funds of the United States Treasury that are otherwise unappropriated. Under section 411(h)(1) of SMCRA, we distribute prior balance replacement funds to you, the State or Indian tribe, for seven years starting in the Federal fiscal year beginning October 1, 2008.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                     EXHIBIT 23

                         [ERNST & YOUNG LLP LETTERHEAD]






                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No. 33-59244) pertaining to the Security National Bank and Trust
Company 401(k) Profit Sharing Savings Plan and Trust and Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No. 33-80761) pertaining to the Security Banc Corporation 1995 Stock
Option Plan of our report date January 11, 1996, with respect to the
consolidated financial statements of Security Banc Corporation incorporated by
reference in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1995.



                                              ERNST & YOUNG LLP


March 18, 1996
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 Twenty Services, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the Report), I, David J. Noble, Chairman/Director and Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ David J. NobleDavid J. NobleChairman/Director
Principal Executive Officer


Date: November 12, 2010
Map 2-29: Alternative A

Wind Energy Development Restrictions

Related to Greater Sage Grouse Habitat

0 20 40 60 80

Kilometers

0 20 40 60 80

Miles

1

LUP Amendments Planning Area

Boundary

BLM Field Office Boundaries

Forest Service Planning Unit

Boundaries

Sage Grouse Priority Habitat

Management Area (Core)

Sage Grouse Priority Habitat

Management Area (Connectivity)

Wind Energy Exclusion Area

Wind Energy Avoidance Area

BLM and USFS Surface

Management

County Boundaries

NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

FOR USE OF THE DATA FOR PURPOSES NOT INTENDED BY BLM.

Wyoming Sage Grouse Land Use Plan Amendments

Final Environmental Impact Statement - May 2015

W Y O M I N G

M T

I D

M A P A R E A

Crook

Weston

Sundance

Rock Springs

Field Office

§ ̈¦80

U T

C O

N E

S D

Newcastle

Lusk

Douglas

Casper

Cheyenne

Wheatland Torrington

Laramie

Rawlins

Rock Springs

Green River

Evanston

Kemmerer

Pinedale

Rawlins Field Offi ce

Casper Field Offi ce

Newcastle

Field Office

Pinedale

Field Office

Kemmerer

Field Office

Bridger -

Teton

N.F.

Thunder

Basin

N.G.

Thunder

Basin

N.G.

Medicine

Bow

N.F.

Medicine

Bow

N.F.

Medicine

Bow

N.F.

Medicine Bow

N.F.

§ ̈¦25

§ ̈¦25

§ ̈¦90

§ ̈¦80

§ ̈¦80

Platte

G

o

s

h

e

n

Alb

a

n

y

L

a

r

a

mie

C

o

n

v

e

r

s

e

Nio

b

r

a

r

a

Nat rona

Carbon

S

w

e

etw

ate

r

C

a

r

b

o

n

Sublette

Lincoln

T

eto

n

Fr

e

m

o

nt

Wyoming Sage Grouse Land Use Plan Amendments

Note: Identified restrictions displayed on this map

represent the existing management actions

across Greater Sage Grouse core and connectivity

habitat only.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 979 

To amend the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 

and the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2019 to extend certain expiring provisions of law relating to the 

detention of individuals at United States Naval Station Guantanamo 

Bay, Cuba. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 10, 2023 

Mr. FALLON (for himself, Mr. MOYLAN, Mr. DESJARLAIS, Mr. GIMENEZ, and 

Mr. MILLS) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To amend the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2018 and the John S. McCain National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 to extend certain 

expiring provisions of law relating to the detention of 

individuals at United States Naval Station Guantanamo 

Bay, Cuba. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘No Terrorists on U.S. 

5 Soil Act of 2023’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 979 IH

1 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS 

2 FOR TRANSFER OF INDIVIDUALS DETAINED 

3 AT UNITED STATES NAVAL STATION GUANTA4 NAMO BAY, CUBA. 

5 Section 1033 of the John S. McCain National De6 fense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 

7 115–232; 132 Stat. 1954), as most recently amended by 

8 section 1031 of the James M. Inhofe National Defense 

9 Authorization for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117–263) 

10 is further amended by striking ‘‘December 31, 2023’’ and 

11 inserting ‘‘December 31, 2024’’. 

12 SEC. 3. EXTENSION OF PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS TO 

13 CONSTRUCT OR MODIFY FACILITIES IN THE 

14 UNITED STATES TO HOUSE DETAINEES 

15 TRANSFERRED FROM UNITED STATES NAVAL 

16 STATION GUANTANAMO BAY, CUBA. 

17 Section 1034(a) of the John S. McCain National De18 fense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 

19 115–232; 132 Stat. 1954), as most recently amended by 

20 section 1032 of the James M. Inhofe National Defense 

21 Authorization for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117–263) 

22 is further amended by striking ‘‘December 31, 2023’’ and 

23 inserting ‘‘December 31, 2024’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 979 IH

1 SEC. 4. EXTENSION OF PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS TO 

2 CLOSE OR RELINQUISH CONTROL OF UNITED 

3 STATES NAVAL STATION GUANTANAMO BAY, 

4 CUBA. 

5 Section 1036 of the National Defense Authorization 

6 Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Public Law 115–91; 131 Stat. 

7 1551), as most recently amended by section 1034 of the 

8 James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for 

9 Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117–263) is further amend10 ed by striking ‘‘2023’’ and inserting ‘‘2024’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT
32.1








Section 906
Certifications








Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, the undersigned, Andrew E. Kersey, the President and Chief Executive
Officer and Jeffery A. Baird, the Chief Financial Officer of CAS Medical
Systems, Inc. (the “issuer”), do hereby certify that the report on Form 10-K
accompanying this certification (the “report”) fully complies with the
requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
((15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that information contained in the report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the issuer.











/s/
Andrew E. Kersey





Andrew E.
Kersey


President
and Chief Executive Officer


CAS
Medical Systems, Inc.


March 29,
2010

















/s/
Jeffery A. Baird





Jeffery
A. Baird


Chief
Financial Officer


CAS
Medical Systems, Inc.


March 29,
2010
1 The legislative hi story discussed in Judge Hill's dissenting opinion does not cast such doubt. Although a Senate conference report does state, "It is the intent of the conferees that any State law regulating the political activities of State and local officers and employees is not preempted or superseded by the amendments to [the FECA]," S. Conf. Rep. No. 1237, 93d Cong., 2d Sess. (1974), reprinted in 1974 U.S.C.C.A.N. 5618, 5669, it is clear that this statement was aimed at preser ving the so-called "little Hatch acts" of the states, not at permitting direct regulation of the activities of federal candidates. See Weber v. Heaney , 995 F.2d 872, 876-77 (8th Cir. 1993) (overturning state law creating monetary incentives for federal candidates to limit campaign expenditures); Reeder v. Kansas City Bd. of Police Comm'rs , 733 F.2d 543, 545-46 (8th Cir. 1984) (upholding a "little Hatch act"). CARNES, Circuit Judge, concurring: I concur in the Court's holding that O.C.G.A. § 21-5-35, which has the effect of limiting the time for making contributions to some candidates for federal office, is preempted by the Federal Election Campaign Act, 2 U.S.C. § 431 et seq. ("FECA"). However, I would base that conclusion upon the express language of the preemption clause in the act, 2 U.S.C. § 453, which states unambiguously that the provisions of the act and rules prescribed under it, "supersede and preempt anyprovision of State law with respect to election to Federal office." (emphasis added) A state law regulating the time in which a category of citizens can accept

contributions to run for election to federal office is a "State law with respect to election to Federal office." It is as simple as that. Moreover, nothing in either the legislative history of the act or in the rules and regulations adopted by the Federal Election Commission casts any doubt upon the clear and manifest preemptive purpose of Congress as plainly stated in the act itself. 1 The discussion in Judge Kravitch's opinion about the deference that might be due the Commission's regulations and advisory2 opinions if there were any ambiguity in FECA's preemption language is, in my view, unnecessary to proper decision of this appeal, because there is no ambiguity in the statutory language. Accordingly, while I agree that FECA preempts O.C.G.A. § 21-5-35, I do not join the part of Judge Kravitch's opinion that discusses the effect of the Federal Election Commission's regulations and advisory opinions.
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.

§ 75.211 Roof testing and scaling. ( a ) A visual examination of the roof, face and ribs shall be made immediately before any work is started in an area and thereafter as conditions warrant.
( b ) Where the mining height permits and the visual examination does not disclose a hazardous condition, sound and vibration roof tests, or other equivalent tests, shall be made where supports are to be installed. When sound and vibration tests are made, they shall be conducted— ( 1 ) After the ATRS system is set against the roof and before other support is installed; or
( 2 ) Prior to manually installing a roof support. This test shall begin under supported roof and progress no further than the location where the next support is to be installed.
( c ) When a hazardous roof, face, or rib condition is detected, the condition shall be corrected before there is any other work or travel in the affected area. If the affected area is left unattended, each entrance to the area shall be posted with a readily visible warning, or a physical barrier shall be installed to impede travel into the area.
( d ) A bar for taking down loose material shall be available in the working place or on all face equipment except haulage equipment. Bars provided for taking down loose material shall be of a length and design that will allow the removal of loose material from a position that will not expose the person performing this work to injury from falling material.
§ 942.764 Process for designating areas unsuitable for surface coal mining operations. ( a ) Part 764 of this chapter, *State Process for Designating Areas Unsuitable for Surface Coal Mining Operations,* shall apply to surface coal mining and reclamation operations.
( b ) The Secretary shall notify the Tennessee Department of Health and Environment of any area designated unsuitable or for which such designation has been requested or terminated.
( c ) Unsuitability designations made under the Tennessee State program shall remain valid unless and until terminated.