alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Map 2-33: Proposed Plan

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)

USFS Proposed Priority Habitat

Management Area (Connectivity)

USFS Proposed Priority Habitat

Management Area (Core)

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

are in addition to existing restrictions already

approved through previous planning efforts.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM DRAVO
CORPORATION'S JUNE 30, 1997 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                             510
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    21546
<ALLOWANCES>                                       218
<INVENTORY>                                      16931
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 40288
<PP&E>                                          256361
<DEPRECIATION>                                  116524
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  238137
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            33151
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                         15100
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            20000
<PREFERRED>                                         19
<OTHER-SE>                                       83046
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    238137
<SALES>                                          80059
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 80059
<CGS>                                            60759
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    60759
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                3169
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   5796
<INCOME-TAX>                                       410
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               5386
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      5386
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .28
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
### §304112. Effectiveness of Federal grant and assistance programs

(a) Cooperative Agreements.—The Council may enter into a cooperative agreement with any Federal agency that administers a grant or assistance program for the purpose of improving the effectiveness of the administration of the program in meeting the purposes and policies of this division. The cooperative agreement may include provisions that modify the selection criteria for a grant or assistance program to further the purposes of this division or that allow the Council to participate in the selection of recipients, if those provisions are not inconsistent with the grant or assistance program's statutory authorization and purpose.

(b) Review of Grant and Assistance Programs.—The Council may—

(1) review the operation of any Federal grant or assistance program to evaluate the effectiveness of the program in meeting the purposes and policies of this division;

(2) make recommendations to the head of any Federal agency that administers the program to further the consistency of the program with the purposes and policies of this division and to improve its effectiveness in carrying out those purposes and policies; and

(3) make recommendations to the President and Congress regarding the effectiveness of Federal grant and assistance programs in meeting the purposes and policies of this division, including recommendations with regard to appropriate funding levels.

(Pub. L. 113–287, §3, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3214.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 304112 | 16 U.S.C. 470v–2. | Pub. L. 89–665, title II, §216, as added Pub. L. 109–453, §1(g), Dec. 22, 2006, 120 Stat. 3368. |

Section
#### Kevin R. Roberts et al., Respondents, v Derrick Joller et al., Appellants.

[834 NYS2d 778]—

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Wayne County (Stephen R. Sirkin, A.J.), entered June 8, 2006 in a personal injury action. The order denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint.

*1225It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the motion is granted, and the amended complaint is dismissed.

Memorandum: Plaintiffs commenced this action seeking damages for injuries sustained by plaintiff Kevin R Roberts when defendants’ dog collided with him while he was riding his bicycle on a public street. Supreme Court erred in denying defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint. Defendants met their initial burden by submitting evidence establishing that, prior to the accident at issue, their dog had not run into the street or chased a vehicle or bicycle *(see Oerlemans v Cornish,*21 AD3d 1308 [2005]; *Hansen v Perez,*12 AD3d 1141 [2004]; *Sinon v Anastasi,*244 AD2d 973 [1997]). Plaintiffs “failed to raise an issue of fact whether defendants had actual or constructive notice of the dog’s ‘propensity to interfere with vehicular traffic’ ” *(Hansen,*12 AD3d 1141 [2004]; *see Staller v Westfall,*225 AD2d 885 [1996]; *Nilsen v Johnson,*191 AD2d 930, 931 [1993]). Evidence that the dog had escaped from the backyard once or twice prior to the accident is insufficient to raise an issue of fact to defeat the motion *(see Hansen,*12 AD3d 1141 [2004]; *Berg v Chawgo,*277 AD2d 620, 621 [2000]; *Nilsen,*191 AD2d at 931), “as is evidence of defendants’ alleged violation of the local leash law” *(Hansen, 12*AD3d 1141 [2004]; *see Elmore v Wukovits,*288 AD2d 875 [2001]). Present—Hurlbutt, J.P., Martoche, Smith, Centra and Peradotto, JJ.
#### § 1615.3 Registration procedures.

Persons required by selective service law and the Proclamation of the President to register shall be registered in accord with procedures prescribed by the Director of Selective Service.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         369,370
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,042,416
<ALLOWANCES>                                    20,000
<INVENTORY>                                  1,105,162
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,214,003
<PP&E>                                       4,857,508
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,990,957
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,428,754
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,467,940
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,428,754
<SALES>                                      2,661,493
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,661,493
<CGS>                                        2,071,807
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  200,817
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              56,504
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                332,365
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (132,945)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            199,420
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   199,420
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .15


</TABLE>
### SUBCHAPTER VI—DRUG ABUSE, ALCOHOL ABUSE, AND ALCOHOLISM
IV 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1029 

Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to establish a Permanent 

Select Committee on Aging. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 23, 2024 

Mr. MAGAZINER (for himself, Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN, Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin, Ms. PRESSLEY, Ms. KAPTUR, Ms. NORTON, Ms. BARRAGA ́N, Ms. 

LOIS FRANKEL of Florida, Mr. TAKANO, Ms. CASTOR of Florida, Mr. 

AMO, Ms. MATSUI, Ms. LEE of California, Ms. BROWNLEY, Ms. 

BONAMICI, and Ms. PINGREE) submitted the following resolution; which 

was referred to the Committee on Rules 

RESOLUTION 

Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to 

establish a Permanent Select Committee on Aging. 

1 Resolved, That rule X of the Rules of the House of 

2 Representatives is amended by adding at the end the fol3 lowing new clause: 

4 ‘‘Permanent Select Committee on Aging 

5 ‘‘12. There is established a Permanent Select Com6 mittee on Aging which shall not have legislative jurisdic7 tion but which shall have jurisdiction— 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HRES 1029 IH 

1 ‘‘(1) to conduct a continuing comprehensive 

2 study and review of the problems of the older Amer3 ican, including but not limited to income mainte4 nance, poverty, housing, health (including medical 

5 research), welfare, employment, education, recre6 ation, and long-term care; 

7 ‘‘(2) to study the use of all practicable means 

8 and methods of encouraging the development of pub9 lic and private programs and policies which will as10 sist the older American in taking a full part in na11 tional life and which will encourage the utilization of 

12 the knowledge, skills, special aptitudes, and abilities 

13 of older Americans to contribute to a better quality 

14 of life for all Americans; 

15 ‘‘(3) to develop policies that would encourage 

16 the coordination of both governmental and private 

17 programs designed to deal with problems of aging; 

18 and 

19 ‘‘(4) to review any recommendations made by 

20 the President or by the White House Conference on 

21 aging relation to programs or policies affecting older 

22 Americans.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
* 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. 01-60159

 

ENRIQUE VELA-GONZALEZ,

Petitioner,

versus

JOHN ASHCROFT, 

ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent.

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

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A24-831-112

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

March 7, 2002

Before REAVLEY, WIENER, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Enrique Vela-Gonzalez petitions for review of an order of

the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) holding that VelaGonzalez’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). Vela-Gonzalez has filed a response in which he
No. 01-60159

-2-

agrees that the case should be remanded to the BIA for

reconsideration in light of Chapa-Garza.

Vela-Gonzalez’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.
11TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Ex parte Christopher Bennett Wooten, * From the County Court

of Howard County,

Trial Court No. 31429.

No. 11-18-00307-CR * December 13, 2018

* Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

(Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J., 

Willson, J., and Wright, S.C.J.,

sitting by assignment)

(Willson, J., not participating)

 This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that the appeal 

should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Therefore, in accordance with this 

court’s opinion, the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 950 

To direct the Secretary of the Navy to notify Congress of the pending 

retirement of any naval vessel that is a viable candidate for artificial 

reefing, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 9, 2023 

Ms. SALAZAR (for herself, Mr. CASE, Mr. WITTMAN, Ms. BROWNLEY, Mr. 

BILIRAKIS, Mr. WALTZ, and Mrs. CAMMACK) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of the Navy to notify Congress of 

the pending retirement of any naval vessel that is a 

viable candidate for artificial reefing, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Re-using Equipment 

5 for Environmental Fortification Act’’ or the ‘‘REEF Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 950 IH

1 SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION OF PENDING RE2 TIREMENTS OF NAVAL VESSELS THAT ARE 

3 VIABLE CANDIDATES FOR ARTIFICIAL 

4 REEFING. 

5 (a) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Con6 gress that the Secretary of the Navy should explore and 

7 solicit artificial reefing opportunities with appropriate en8 tities for any naval vessel planned for retirement before 

9 initiating any plans to dispose of the vessel. 

10 (b) REPORT.—Not later than 90 days before the re11 tirement from the Naval Vessel Register of any naval ves12 sel that is a viable candidate for artificial reefing, the Sec13 retary of the Navy shall notify Congress of the pending 

14 retirement of such vessel. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
### **CHAPTER 2004—NATIONAL PARKS AND PUBLIC LAND LEGACY RESTORATION FUND**

Sec.
200401.
Definitions.
200402.
National Parks and Public Land Legacy Restoration Fund.
Exhibit 31.01

I, Catherine Thompson, certify that:

1.     I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of
OHANA ENTERPRISES, INC.;

2.     Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

3.     Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
 financial information included in this quarterly 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
quarterly report;

4.     The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in Exchange Act Rules 13a - 15(e) and 15d - 15(e)
for the registrant and we have:

       a.      designed such disclosure controls and procedures or
caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others
within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly
report is being prepared;

       b.      evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's
disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this quarterly report
and our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this quarterly
report based on such evaluation; and

       c.      disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the registrant's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during; the
registrant's fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case
of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;

5.     The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee
of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent function):

       a.      All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which is
reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

       b.      Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management
or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
controls over financial reporting.

Date: November 22, 2004

/s/ Catherine Thompson

Catherine Thompson
Interim Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer
### **CHAPTER 101—DEFINITIONS**

Sec.
10101.
Definitions.
### **CHAPTER 3027—HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAMS AND AUTHORITIES FOR INDIAN TRIBES AND NATIVE HAWAIIAN ORGANIZATIONS**

Sec.
302701.
Program to assist Indian tribes in preserving historic property.
302702.
Indian tribe to assume functions of State Historic Preservation Officer.
302703.
Apportionment of grant funds.
302704.
Contracts and cooperative agreements.
302705.
Agreement for review under tribal historic preservation regulations.
302706.
Eligibility for inclusion on National Register.
###### Editorial Note on Part 773

#### Editorial Note:

At 82 FR 54938, Nov. 17, 2017, as required by the Congressional Review Act and Public Law 115-5, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement removed all amendments to part 773 made effective on Jan. 19, 2017, at 81 FR 93323-93325, Dec. 20, 2016.

#### § 773.26 How to challenge an ownership or control listing or finding.

This section applies to you if you challenge an ownership or control listing or finding.

(a) To challenge an ownership or control listing or finding, you must submit a written explanation of the basis for the challenge, along with any evidence or explanatory materials you wish to provide under § 773.27(b) of this part, to the regulatory authority, as identified in the following table.

| If the challenge concerns . . . | Then you must submit a written explanation to . . . |
| --- | --- |
| (1) a pending State or Federal permit application | the regulatory authority with jurisdiction over the application. |
| (2) your ownership or control of a surface coal mining operation, and you are not currently seeking a permit | the regulatory authority with jurisdiction over the surface coal mining operation. |

(b) The provisions of this section and of §§ 773.27 and 773.28 of this part apply only to challenges to ownership or control listings or findings. You may not use these provisions to challenge your liability or responsibility under any other provision of the Act or its implementing regulations.

(c) When the challenge concerns a violation under the jurisdiction of a different regulatory authority, the regulatory authority with jurisdiction over the permit application or permit must consult the regulatory authority with jurisdiction over the violation and the AVS Office to obtain additional information.

(d) A regulatory authority responsible for deciding a challenge under paragraph (a) of this section may request an investigation by the AVS Office.

(e) At any time, you, a person listed in AVS as an owner or controller of a surface coal mining operation, may request an informal explanation from the AVS Office as to the reason you are shown in AVS in an ownership or control capacity. Within 14 days of your request, the AVS Office will provide a response describing why you are listed in AVS.

[65 FR 796676, Dec. 19, 2000, as amended at 72 FR 68029, Dec. 3, 2007]
EXHIBIT 32.2

                            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 amended Annual Report of AccuPoll Holding Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Diana Dimadi, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.


May 20, 2005                                      /s/ Diana Dimadi
                                                    ----------------------------
                                                        Diana Dimadi
                                                        Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained
by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
#### John F. Wallace et al., as Executors, etc., v. Michael Feely. Daniel Daly, Purchaser, Appellant.

(Argued January 31, 1882;

decided February 10, 1882.)

*Damd MoOlure*for appellant.

*W. P. Putney*for respondent.

Agree to affirmno opinion.

All concur.

Order affirmed.