alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 750.13 Claims: Single service responsibility. ( a ) The Department of Defense has assigned single-service responsibility for processing claims in foreign countries under the following acts. The service and country assignments are in DODDIR 5515.8 of 9 June 1990. ( 1 ) Foreign Claims Act (10 U.S.C. 2734);
( 2 ) Military Claims Act (10 U.S.C. 2733);
( 3 ) International Agreements Claims Act (10 U.S.C. 2734a and b), on the pro-rata cost sharing of claims pursuant to international agreement;
( 4 ) NATO Status of Forces Agreement (4 UST 1792, TIAS 2846) and other similar agreements;
( 5 ) Medical Care Recovery Act (42 U.S.C. 2651-2653) claims for reimbursement for medical care furnished by the United States;
( 6 ) Nonscope Claims Act (10 U.S.C. 2737), claims not cognizable under any other provision of law;
( 7 ) Federal Claims Collection Act (31 U.S.C. Sections 3701, 3702, and 3711), claims and demands by the United States Government; and
( 8 ) Public Law 87-212 (10 U.S.C. 2736), advance or emergency payments.
( b ) Single service assignments for processing claims mentioned above are as follows: ( 1 ) Department of the Army: Austria, Belgium, El Salvador, the Federal Republic of Germany, Grenada, Honduras, Hungary, Korea, Iraq, Kuwait, Latvia, Lithuania, the Marshall Islands, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Switzerland, and as the Receiving State Office in the United States under 10 U.S.C. Sections 2734a—2734b and the NATO Status of Forces Agreement, and other Status of Forces Agreements with countries not covered by the NATO agreement. Claims arising from Operation Joint Endeavor, including the former Yugoslavia, Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic, as well as the Rwanda Refugee Crisis Area are also assigned to the Army.
( 2 ) Department of the Navy: Bahrain, Greece, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Spain and the United Arab Emirates.
( 3 ) Department of the Air Force: Australia, Azores, Canada, Cyprus, Denmark, India, Japan, Luxembourg, Morocco, Nepal, Norway, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Turkey, the United Kingdom, Egypt, Oman, and claims involving, or generated by, the United States Central Command (CENTCOM) and the United States Special Operations Command (SOCOM), that arise in countries not specifically assigned to the Departments of the Army and the Navy.
( c ) *U.S. forces afloat cases under $2,500.00.* Notwithstanding the single service assignments above, the Navy may settle claims under $2,500.00 caused by personnel not acting within the scope of employment and arising in foreign ports visited by U.S. forces afloat and may, subject to the concurrence of the authorities of the receiving state concerned, process such claims.
[57 FR 4722, Feb. 7, 1992, as amended at 72 FR 53420, Sept. 19, 2007]
### §1738j. Oversight

The President may designate appropriate United States agencies to review the implementation of programs under this subchapter and the fiscal audits relating to such programs. Such oversight shall not constitute active management of an Environmental Fund.

(July 10, 1954, ch. 469, title VI, §611, as added Pub. L. 101–624, title XV, §1512, Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 3661.)

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Delegation of Functions

For delegation of functions of President under this section, see section 1 of Ex. Ord. No. 13345, July 8, 2004, 69 F.R. 41901, set out as a note under section 1738 of this title.
### §1965. Repealed. Pub. L. 95–334, title I, §120, Aug. 4, 1978, 92 Stat. 427

Section, Pub. L. 87–128, title III, §325, Aug. 8, 1961, 75 Stat. 311; Pub. L. 94–68, §6, Aug. 5, 1975, 89 Stat. 382, authorized delegation of authority to State Directors of Farmers Home Administration for making emergency loans.
§ 553.32 Conduct of memorial services and ceremonies. ( a ) The Executive Director shall ensure the sanctity of public and private memorial and ceremonial events.
( b ) All memorial services and ceremonies within Army National Military Cemeteries, other than official ceremonies, shall be purely memorial in purpose and may be dedicated only to: ( 1 ) The memory of all those interred, inurned, or memorialized in Army National Military Cemeteries;
( 2 ) The memory of all those who died in the military service of the United States while serving during a particular conflict or while serving in a particular military unit or units; or
( 3 ) The memory of the individual or individuals to be interred, inurned, or memorialized at the particular site at which the service or ceremony is held.
( c ) Memorial services and ceremonies at Army National Military Cemeteries will not include partisan political activities.
( d ) Private memorial services may be closed to the media and public as determined by the decedent's primary next of kin.
( e ) Public memorial services and public wreath-laying ceremonies shall be open to all members of the public to observe.
#### § 240.2 Applicability.

This part applies to the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Military Departments, the Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Joint Staff, the Combatant Commands, the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Defense, the Defense Agencies, the DoD Field Activities, and all other organizational entities within the Department of Defense (hereafter referred to collectively as the “DoD Components”). The term “Military Services,” as used herein, refers to the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, and the Marine Corps.
### §5519. Crediting amounts received for certain Reserve or National Guard service

An amount (other than a travel, transportation, or per diem allowance) received by an employee or individual for military service as a member of the Reserve or National Guard for a period for which he is granted military leave under section 6323(b) shall be credited against the pay payable to the employee or individual with respect to his civilian position for that period.

(Added Pub. L. 90–588, §2(b), Oct. 17, 1968, 82 Stat. 1152; amended Pub. L. 102–378, §2(39), Oct. 2, 1992, 106 Stat. 1351; Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title V, §516(b), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 309; Pub. L. 117–81, div. A, title XI, §1109(a), Dec. 27, 2021, 135 Stat. 1951.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2021—Pub. L. 117–81 struck out "or (c)" after "section 6323(b)".

1996—Pub. L. 104–106 substituted "granted military leave" for "entitled to leave".

1992—Pub. L. 102–378 substituted "6323(b) or (c)" for "6323(c) or (d) of this title".

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

#### Application of 2021 Amendment

Pub. L. 117–81, div. A, title XI, §1109(b), Dec. 27, 2021, 135 Stat. 1951, provided that: "The amendment made by subsection (a) [amending this section] shall apply to any amounts credited, by operation of such section 5519, against the pay of an employee or individual described under section 6323(c) of such title on or after the date of enactment of this Act [Dec. 27, 2021]."
## Ninth Court of Appeals

BE IT REMEMBERED:

THAT at the term of the Honorable Ninth Court of Appeals of the State of Texas, begun and holden at Beaumont on the 1 st day of January, A.D. 20 1 7 , present , Chief Justice STEVE MCKEITHEN and Justices C HARLES KREGER
, HOLLIS HORTON and LEANNE JOHNSON

. “Pursuant to and in compliance with an Order of the Supreme Court of Texas, dated September 27, 2017 , it is ordered that th ese cause s be transferred to the F ourteenth Court of Appeals, at Houston , Texas, and that the Clerk of this Court certify all orders made in this Court, and transmit all records and papers in said cause to the Clerk of the F ourteenth Court of Appeals.

09

- 1 7

- 335

- C R Phillip Anthony Zagone v. The State of Texas 09

- 1 7

- 337

- C V James K . Collins et al v. D.R. Horton

- Texas LTD 09

- 1 7

- 340

- C V Jonathan Paul Rivenbark v . Shannon Rivenbark 09

- 1 7

- 342

- C V F. Don Lacy and Homes and More v . Luis A. Castillo 09

- 1 7

- 345

- C V James Andrew Brenek, et al v . Frank Jaap 09

- 1 7

- 350

- C V Kevin P. Kaley v

. Terri E. Kaley 09

- 1 7

- 351

- C V Sherry Macha et al v . Touchstone Neurorecovery Center et al 09

- 1 7

- 352

- C R Joseph Arthur Alridge v. State of Texas 09

- 1 7

- 354

- C V In Re Commitment of John Arthur Graves 09

- 1 7

- 355

- C R Jeffrey Michael McDonough v . The State of Texas 09

- 1 7

- 356

- C R Jeffrey Michael McDonough v. The State of Texas 09

- 1 7

- 357

- CR Leslie Jones Burks v. The State of Texas 09

- 1 7

- 358

- CR Leslie Jones Burks v. The State of Texas 09

- 1 7

- 359

- CR Cedric Ramon McGills Jr. v. The State of Texas 09

- 1 7

- 361

- C V Alex Melvin Wade Jr. v . Dominion at Woodlands

I, Carol Anne Harley , Clerk of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth District of Texas, at the City of Beaumont, here in certify that the foregoing is a true copy of this Court’s order entered from this Cou rt to the Court of Appeals for the F ourteenth District of Texas at Houston as appears of record in Minute Book Volume 22

. ”

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and affix the seal of this Court at Beaumont this 2 nd of October 20 1 7

.

__________________________ Carol Anne Harley Clerk of the Court
Harvest for this publication is found in ~/gpo92570
.
Appeal No. 76-118.

#### Vera Aquilante *et al. v.*Empire Mutual Insurance Company.

*Temkin, Merolla ■& Zurier, Amedeo C. Merolla, Norbert Fessel,*for plaintiffs.

*John W. Kershaw,*for defendant.

The defendant’s motion to extend the time for filing its brief to June 10, 1977, is granted. This is the last extension which will be granted in this matter.
EXHIBIT 21.1

LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF

EXCO RESOURCES, INC.



|                             |  |                       
|---------------------------- |  | ----------------------
|Name of Subsidiary           |  | State of Incorporation
|                             | 
|EXCO Services, Inc.          |  | Delaware              
|                             | 
|EXCO Partners GP, LLC        |  | Delaware              
|                             | 
|EXCO GP Partners Old, LP     |  | Delaware              
|                             | 
|EXCO Partners OLP GP, LLC    |  | Delaware              
|                             | 
|EXCO Operating Company, LP   |  | Delaware              
|                             | 
|EXCO Water Resources, LLC    |  | Delaware              
|                             | 
|Bonchasse Land Company, LLC  |  | Louisiana             
|                             | 
|EXCO Caddo Acquisition, LLC  |  | Delaware              
|                             | 
|PCMWL, LLC                   |  | Louisiana             
|                             | 
|Vernon Gathering, LLC        |  | Delaware              
|                             | 
|TGGT Holdings, LLC           |  | Delaware              
|                             | 
|TGGT GP Holdings, LLC        |  | Delaware              
|                             | 
|TGG Pipeline, Ltd.           |  | Texas                 
|                             | 
|Talco Midstream Assets, Ltd. |  | Texas                 
|                             | 
|EXCO Mid-Continent MLP, LLC  |  | Delaware              
|                             | 
|EXCO Resources (PA), Inc.    |  | Delaware              
|                             | 
|EXCO Resources (WV), Inc.    |  | Delaware
EXHIBIT 32.1
 SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
  (1)
    
    The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended
May 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition, and results of operations
of the Company as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the
Report.
 /s/ Keith S. WaltersKeith S. WaltersChairman of the Board and
Chief Executive Officer
Date: June 28, 2011 The foregoing Certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350; it is not
being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act, and is not to be
incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date
hereof, regardless of any general incorporation languages in such filing.
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION.

UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL

AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.

IN THE

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent,

v.

NORMAN SHIGERU SHINSAKO, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 18-0132 PRPC

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Yavapai County

No. V1300CR201480437

V1300CR201580196

V1300CR201880006

The Honorable Joseph C. Butner, III, Judge, Pro Tempore

The Honorable Jeffrey G. Paupore, Judge, Pro Tempore

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Yavapai County Attorney's Office, Camp Verde

By Patti Marie Wortman

Counsel for Respondent

Norman Shigeru Shinsako, Florence

Petitioner

FILED 7-12-2018
STATE v. SHINSAKO

Decision of the Court

2

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Diane M. Johnsen, Judge Paul J. McMurdie and Judge 

David D. Weinzweig delivered the decision of the Court.

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Norman Shigeru Shinsako seeks review of the 

superior court's order denying his petition for post-conviction relief, filed 

pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. This is petitioner's 

second petition for post-conviction relief. 

¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or error of law, this court will 

not disturb a superior court's ruling on a petition for post-conviction relief. 

State v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573, 577, ¶ 19 (2012). It is petitioner's burden to 

show that the superior court abused its discretion by denying the petition 

for post-conviction relief. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 537, ¶ 1 (App. 2011) 

(petitioner has burden of establishing abuse of discretion on review).

¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior 

court's order denying the petition for post-conviction relief, and the petition 

for review. Petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion. 

¶4 For the foregoing reasons, we grant review and deny relief.
#### AGNOFF FAMILY TRUST v. LANDFALL ASSOC.

No. 596P97

Case below: 127 N.C.App. 743

Petition by plaintiffs for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 5 February 1998.
#### CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE CO. v. WETHERINGTON

No. 528P97

Case below: 127 N.C.App. 457

Petition by defendant for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 5 February 1998.
§ 536.122 Limitation of settlement of maritime claims. ( a ) Within the United States the period of completing an administrative settlement under the AMCSA is subject to the same time limitation as that for beginning suit under the SIAA or PVA; that is, a two-year period from the date the cause of the action accrued. The claimant must have agreed to accept the settlement and it must be approved for payment by the Secretary of the Army or other approval authority prior to the end of such period. The presentation of a claim, or its consideration by the DA, neither waives nor extends the two-year limitation period and the claimant should be so informed, in writing, when the claim is acknowledged. See § 536.28.
( b ) For causes of action under the AEA, filing an administrative claim is mandatory. However, suit is required under the two-year time limit applicable to the SIAA and PVA, even though the AEA provides that no suit shall be filed under six months after filing a claim.
( c ) For causes of action arising outside the United States, there is no time limitation for completing an administrative settlement.
Washington, Belinda (OST) 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Attachments: 

Hi All, 

Adams, Kevin (OST) 

Wednesday, January 09, 2013 1:48 PM 

Alaska DOT, Steven D. Hatter; cityclerk@cityofcordova.net; clerk@gustavus-ak.net; 

clerk@ci. petersburg. ak. us; clerk@wrangell. com; YakCierk@Yakutatak. us; 

YakCierk@Yakutat.us 

Alaska DOT, Richard Sewell; Alaska DOT, Linda Bustamante ; Washington, Belinda (OST) 

Proposal of Alaska Airlines at Southeast, AK 

2013 Proposal of Alaska Airlines.pdf 

Attached above is a copy of Alaska Airlines' proposal for Essential Air Service (EAS) at the five Southeast communities: 

Cordova, Gustavus, Petersburg, Wrangell, and Yakutat. We are currently reviewing that proposal. The attached 

proposal is directly from the carrier and will be in the Docket shortly, which you may access through Regulations.gov at 

DOT-OST-1998-4899, along with other pertinent information on this proceeding. Community comments are a critically 

important element in our carrier selection decision. We ask that you get back to us, preferably by email, no later than 

January 31, 2013. We will docket this email, as well as any replies. 

In brief, look at the proposal, and if you have any questions, give me a buzz. Otherwise get back to us by the deadline. 

Best, 

Kevin Adams 

202-366-1047 

1
§ 651.12 Determining appropriate level of NEPA analysis. ( a ) The flow chart shown in Figure 1 summarizes the process for determining documentation requirements, as follows: ( 1 ) If the proposed action qualifies as a CX (subpart D of this part), and the screening criteria are met (§ 651.29), the action can proceed. Some CXs require a REC.
( 2 ) If the proposed action is adequately covered within an existing EA or EIS, a REC is prepared to that effect. The REC should state the applicable EA or EIS title and date, and identify where it may be reviewed (§ 651.19, Figure 3). The REC is then attached to the proponent's record copy of that EA or EIS.
( 3 ) If the proposed action is within the general scope of an existing EA or EIS, but requires additional information, a supplement is prepared, considering the new, modified, or missing information. Existing documents are incorporated by reference and conclusions are published as either a FNSI or NOI to supplement the EIS.
( 4 ) If the proposed action is not covered adequately in any existing EA or EIS, or is of a significantly larger scope than that described in the existing document, an EA is prepared, followed by either a FNSI or NOI to prepare an EIS. Initiation of an EIS may proceed without first preparing an EA, if deemed appropriate by the proponent.
( 5 ) If the proposed action is not within the scope of any existing EA or EIS, then the proponent must begin the preparation of a new EA or EIS, as appropriate.
( b ) The proponent of a proposed action may adopt appropriate environmental documents (EAs or EISs) prepared by another agency (40 CFR 1500.4(n) and 1506.3). In such cases, the proponent will document their use in a REC FNSI, or ROD.
### The Imperial Valley, California, earthquake of October 15, 1979

By: Water Resources Division, U.S. Geological Survey

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1254

#### Links

- More information:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**                            (html)
-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 4**                            (pdf) 
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

No abstract available.

#### Study Area

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

M.L.,

Appellant,

v.

J.L.

Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-16-00139-CV

Appeal from the

231st District Court

of Tarrant County, Texas

(TC#231-576495-15)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes the appeal should be 

dismissed for want of prosecution. We therefore dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. We 

further order Appellant pay all costs of this appeal, and this decision be certified below for 

observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 10TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2016.

STEVEN L. HUGHES, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.
#### HEATH, Appellant, v. HASBROUCK, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

October 23, 1903.)

Action t by William H. Heath, as administrator, against James F. Hasbrouck. W. L. Cahn, for appellant. E. A. Jones, for respondent.

No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.
#### § 37.1340 Program official.

A Federal Government program manager, scientific officer, or other individual who is responsible for managing the technical program being carried out through the use of a TIA.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.A

                           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 on Form 10-Q/A for the period
ending March 31, 2003, of El Paso Natural Gas Company (the "Company") as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, John W. Somerhalder II, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer,
certify (i) that the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and (ii) that
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

                                              /s/ JOHN W. SOMERHALDER II
                                          --------------------------------------
                                                  John W. Somerhalder II
                                                Chairman of the Board and
                                                 Chief Executive Officer
                                              (Principal Executive Officer)

                                          June 20, 2003

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to El Paso Natural Gas Company and will be retained by El Paso Natural
Gas Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.