alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §389. Transfer of certain dry land and irrigation field stations to States

The Secretary of Agriculture is authorized, at such times as he deems appropriate, to convey by appropriate conveyances, without consideration, the interest of the United States in the lands, including water rights, buildings, and improvements presently comprising or appurtenant to the following dry land and irrigation field stations, to the States in which such stations are located, when, in the opinion of the Secretary of Agriculture, the transfer of any such station will result in establishing a more effective program in the cooperative agricultural experimental work of the Department of Agriculture and the respective State and the furtherance of agricultural experimental work on a national or regional basis will be better served by such transfer: Huntley, Montana; Mitchell, Nebraska; Fallon, Nevada; Tucumcari, New Mexico; Hermiston, Oregon; Sheridan, Wyoming: Provided, That when any or all of the land, including water rights, comprising any such station is public-domain land, only the Secretary of the Interior may by patent or other appropriate conveyance transfer such lands to the respective States: Provided further, That when any easement necessary to a station conveyed or patented hereunder is on public-domain lands, only the Secretary of the Interior may grant such easements to the State to which the station has been conveyed.

(Sept. 23, 1950, ch. 1005, §1, 64 Stat. 981.)

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

Functions of all officers, agencies, and employees of Department of Agriculture transferred, with certain exceptions, to Secretary of Agriculture by 1953 Reorg. Plan No. 2, §1, eff. June 4, 1953, 18 F.R. 3219, 67 Stat. 633, set out as a note under section 2201 of this title.
#### BEGEN v. CURTIS et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

March 20, 1903.)

1. Submission of Controversy — Defects—Dismissal,

Where, on a submission of controversy without action, there is opposite the title a memorandum to the effect that it is a case agreed upon in a controversy submitted without action, pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure, but it is not stated that the case agreed upon contains a statement of the facts, as required by the Code, and there is no stipulation between the parties that the papers constitute a case containing a statement of the facts which have been agreed upon, the submission will be dismissed.

Submission of controversy between Sadie M. Begen as plaintiff and Sarah L. Curtis and others as defendants.

Submission dismissed.

Argued before VAN BRUNT, P. J., and McLAUGHLIN, O’BRIEN, INGRAHAM, and LAUGHLIN, JJ.

Edwin L. Ford, for plaintiff.

I. M. Pettus, for defendant.

PER CURIAM.

The proposed submission in this case contains no agreement as to the facts which are admitted and form the subject of the alleged submission. Opposite the title, there is a memorandum to the effect that it is a case agreed upon in a controversy submitted without action, pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure. That does not form any part of the submission, but is merely descriptive. And, furthermore, it is not stated that the case agreed upon contains a statement of the facts as required by the Code. There is no stipulation whatever between the parties that the papers constitute a case dontaining a statement of the facts which has been agreed upon.

The submission must therefore be dismissed, with leave to file a new submission.
Exhibit 11

**BNP U.S. FUNDING L.L.C.**

**COMPUTATION OF NET GAIN PER COMMON SECURITY**

(in thousands, except per share data)

|                                                     | **For the Year Ended         December 31, 2005**                                                                                                        |
|----------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Net income                                               | $ 47,494                                                                                              |
| Less: preferred securities dividend requirement          |                  38,690         |
| Net gain applicable to common securities                 | $ 8,804                                                                                                         |
|                                                     |                                                                                                                                                    |
| Securities:                                              |                                                                                                                                                    |
| Weighted average number of common securities outstanding | 53,011                                                                                                          |
| Net gain per common security                             | $ 166.08                                                                                                        |
NUMBER 13-21-00319-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG 

 

CARRIE M. LEO, Appellant,

v.

TYLER C. THOMAS AND 

NICHOLAS STACEY D/B/A

FRAGILE PLANET WILDLIFE CENTER

FORMERLY KNOWN AS FRAGILE

PLANET WILDLIFE FOUNDATION, Appellees.

 

On appeal from the 444th District Court 

of Cameron County, Texas.

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Benavides, Longoria, and Tijerina

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Tijerina

On September 20, 2021, appellant Carrie M. Leo appealed the trial court’s default 

judgment. By one issue, appellant contends that the trial court improperly determined that 

she is not indigent. We dismiss this appeal as moot.
2

The record shows that during the pendency of this appeal, on October 28, 2021, 

the trial court signed a final judgment finding appellant indigent thereby granting the relief 

she seeks in this appeal. Thus, appellant’s issue complaining of the trial court’s failure to 

find her indigent has been remedied, and we conclude that this appeal is therefore moot. 

See Flamingo Permian Oil & Gas, L.L.C. v. Star Expl., L.L.C., 569 S.W.3d 329, 331 (Tex. 

App.—El Paso 2019, no pet.) (dismissing an appeal as moot when the three complainedof appellate issues were remedied by the trial court’s issuance of a subsequent order 

executed while the appeal was pending); State v. Garza, 774 S.W.2d 724, 727 (Tex. 

App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg 1989, pet. ref’d) (“It is axiomatic that a cause becomes 

moot when the appellate court’s judgment cannot have any practical legal effect upon a 

controversy.”).

We dismiss the appeal as moot.

JAIME TIJERINA

Justice

Delivered and filed on the

10th day of November, 2021.
FREMONT

CARBON

SWEETWATER

ALBANY

NATRONA

SUBLETTE

LINCOLN

CONVERSE

CROOK

UINTA

LARAMIE

WESTON

PLATTE

GOSHEN

NIOBRARA

§ ̈¦25

§ ̈¦80

§ ̈¦80

§ ̈¦80

§ ̈¦25

§ ̈¦90

Bridger-Teton

Thunder 

Basin

Medicine-Bow

Medicine-Bow

Rawlins

Casper

Rock Springs

Kemmerer

Pinedale

Yellowstone Newcastle

National Park

Lusk

Yoder

Hanna

Baggs

Afton

Hulett

Glendo

Casper

Douglas

Bairoil

Rawlins

Laramie

Superior

Sundance

Saratoga

La Barge Guernsey

Pinedale

Kemmerer

Evanston

Cheyenne

Wheatland

Wamsutter

Cokeville

Chugwater

Big Piney

Newcastle

Torrington

Rock River

Pine Bluffs

Green River

Medicine Bow

Fort Laramie

Elk Mountain

Rock Springs

Grand Encampment

0 25 50 100

Miles

0 25 50 100

Kilometers

Wyoming Sage-Grouse 

Land Use Plan Amendments

o

NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY THE BLM FOR USE OF 

THE DATA FOR PURPOSES NOT INTENDED BY BLM.

LUP Amendments Planning Area

BLM Field Office Boundary

Forest Service Planning Unit Boundary

Closed to Mineral Materials

BLM and USFS Surface Lands

Sage-grouse Priority/Core Habitat Areas

Sage-grouse Connectivity Habitat Areas

Counties

Water

Interstate

State / US Hwy

Cities

Map 2-15: Alternative B

Areas Closed to Mineral Materials
### §3416. Amendments to orders

The provisions of this chapter applicable to orders shall be applicable to amendments to orders.

(Pub. L. 95–113, title XVII, §1717, Sept. 29, 1977, 91 Stat. 1040.)

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective Oct. 1, 1977, see section 1901 of Pub. L. 95–113, set out as an Effective Date of 1977 Amendment note under section 1307 of this title.
§ 770.17 Background. ( a ) SUBASE Bangor has been designated as the West Coast home port of the Trident Submarine. Facilities for the repair or overhaul of naval vessels are located at SUBASE Bangor. It is vital to national defense that the operation and use of SUBASE Bangor be continued without undue and unnecessary interruption. Many areas of SUBASE Bangor are of an industrial nature, including construction sites, where inherently dangerous conditions exist.
( b ) For prevention of the interruption of the stated use of the base by the presence of any unauthorized person within the boundaries of SUBASE Bangor, and prevention of injury to any such person as a consequence of the dangerous conditions which exist, as well as for other reasons, it is essential to restrict entry upon SUBASE Bangor to authorized persons only.
### §5605. Independence of authorities

Each authority granted under this chapter shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of, any authority granted to the Secretary or the Commodity Credit Corporation under any other provision of law.

(Pub. L. 95–501, title I, §105, as added Pub. L. 101–624, title XV, §1531, Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 3672.)
E'TOWN CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES         Exhibit 11
              STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
                        (In Thousands Except Per Share Amounts)


                                       Three Months Ended  Twelve Months Ended
                                             March 31,            March 31,
                                          1998      1997       1998       1997
                                        -------   -------    -------    -------
BASIC
EARNINGS
 Income Before Preferred Stock
  Dividends of Subsidiary              $  4,366  $  3,673  $  20,766  $  16,180
 Deduct: Preferred Stock Dividends         (203)     (203)      (813)      (813)
                                         ------    ------     ------     ------
 Net Income Available for Common Stock $  4,163  $  3,470  $  19,953  $  15,367
                                         ------    ------     ------     ------
SHARES 
 Weighted Average Number of Common 
  Shares Outstanding                      8,057     7,818      7,972      7,730
                                         ------    ------     ------     ------
 Basic Earnings Per Share of
  Common Stock                         $   0.52  $   0.44  $    2.50  $    1.99
                                         ======    ======     ======     ======
DILUTED
EARNINGS
 Income Before Preferred Stock
  Dividends of Subsidiary              $  4,366  $  3,673  $  20,766  $  16,180
 Deduct: Preferred Stock Dividends         (203)     (203)      (813)      (813)
 Add: After Tax Interest Expense 
 Applicable to 6 3/4% Convertible 
 Subordinated Debentures                    123       128        498        522
                                         ------    ------     ------     ------
   Adjusted Net Income                 $  4,286  $  3,598  $  20,451  $  15,889
                                         ======    ======     ======     ======
SHARES 
 Weighted Average Number of Common
  Shares Outstanding                      8,057     7,818      7,972      7,730
 Assuming Exercise of Options Reduced
  by the Number of Shares Which Could
  Have Been Purchased With the Proceeds
  From Exercise of Such Options              25        11         21          7
 Assuming Conversion of 6 3/4% Convertible
  Subordinated Debentures (a)               284       287        284        290
                                         ------    ------     ------     ------
  Weighted Average Number of Common
   Shares Outstanding as Adjusted         8,366     8,116      8,277      8,027
                                         ------    ------     ------     ------
Diluted Earnings Per Share of 
 Common Stock                          $   0.51  $   0.44  $    2.47  $    1.98
                                         ======    ======     ======     ======
(a) Convertible at $40 per share.
J udg e Alg enon L . Marbley , United States District J udg e for the S outhern District of O hio, * sitti ngby designation. NO T REC OM M EN DE D F OR F UL L- TEX T P UB LIC AT ION F ile Nam e: 08a0447n.06 F iled: July 30, 2008 No. 07-6146 UN ITED STA TES C OU RT OF AP P EA LS F OR THE SI XT H C IR CU IT
TRACY MCDONAL D, Pla int if f- Ap pe lla nt,
v. JOHNPOT TE R, Po stm a ste r G e ne ra l, Def endant- Appellee
. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ON APPEALFROM THE U NI TED STATES DI STRI CT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DI STRI CT OF TEN NESSEE

Be fore : COOK and GRIFF I N, Circuit J udg es, and MARB L EY, District Judge. * COOK, Circuit J udg e. Plaintiff Tra cy McDona l d ap peals the district c ourt’s grant of summary judgme nt for her

employer, de fenda

nt J ohn Potter, Postm aster G ener al of the United States Postal S ervic e (the “Postal Service” ) on her Rehabilitation Act claims. McDona ld alleg es that the Postal S ervic e fa iled to rea sonably acc ommodate her

two alleg ed disabilities: (1) migr aines induce d by a sensitivity

to fragranc es (i.e. f

ragr ance s worn by

her c oworke rs, clea

ning c hemicals); a

nd (2) a bac k condition. She further alleg es that the Postal Service discriminated and r etaliated a g ainst her due to these disabilities. The Postal Service filed a motion for summ ary judgme nt, and the districtNo. 07-6146

McD onald v. Potter

- 2 - court grante d the motion and dismiss ed with pre judice all o f McDona ld’s claims. Review of the br ie fs and re c or d c ouns e ls u s to a g re e wi th t he dis tr ic t court . B e c a

us e a se pa rate op ini on

wo uld on ly du pli c ate the dis tr ic t c ourt ’s tho ro ugh a na ly sis , w e AF F I RM the c ourt ’s jud g me nt, a do pti ngits
re as o n i n g.
#### STATE v. DOUTHIT

No. 380P97

Case below: 124 N.C.App. 667

Petition by defendant for writ of certiorari to review the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 2 October 1997.
#### PEOPLE ex rel. HAUSER, Appellant, v. PARTRIDGE, Com’r, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

January 9, 1903.)

Proceeding by the people of the state of New York, on the relation of George E. Hauser, against John N. Partridge, commissioner. F. E. Perham, for appellant. T.. Connoly, for respondent.

No opinion. Proceedings affirmed, and writ dismissed, with costs.
Office of the Deputy Secretary Organizational Chart- eff 6/19/2022

Office of the Deputy Secretary

Performance Improvement Office Office of Non-Public Education
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 235 (Thursday, December 6, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72862-72863]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-29481]

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

FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EXAMINATION COUNCIL

[Docket No. AS12-23]

Appraisal Subcommittee Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Appraisal Subcommittee of the Federal Financial Institutions 
Examination Council.

ACTION: Notice of Meeting.

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

    Description: In accordance with Section 1104 (b) of Title XI of the 
Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989, 
as amended, notice is hereby given that the Appraisal Subcommittee 
(ASC) will meet in open session for its regular meeting:
    Location: OCC--400 7th Street SW., Room 7W-601, Washington, DC 
20024.
    Date: December 12, 2012.
    Time: 10:30 a.m.
    Status: Open.
    Matters to be Considered:
    Summary Agenda:
    November 14, 2012 minutes--Open Session.
    (No substantive discussion of the above items is anticipated. These 
matters will be resolved with a single vote unless a member of the ASC 
requests that an item be moved to the discussion agenda.)
    Discussion Agenda:

ASC Policy for the Appraisal Complaint National Hotline
Appraisal Foundation August 2012 Grant Reimbursement Request
Arizona Compliance Review
Pennsylvania Compliance Review

    How to Attend and Observe an ASC meeting:
    Email your name, organization and contact information to 
meetings@asc.gov. You may also send a written request via U.S. Mail, 
fax or commercial carrier to the Executive Director of the ASC, 1401 H 
Street NW.,

[[Page 72863]]

Ste 760, Washington, DC 20005. The fax number is 202-289-4101. Your 
request must be received no later than 4:30 p.m., ET, on the Monday 
prior to the meeting. Attendees must have a valid government-issued 
photo ID and must agree to submit to reasonable security measures. The 
meeting space is intended to accommodate public attendees. However, if 
the space will not accommodate all requests, the ASC may refuse 
attendance on that reasonable basis. The use of any video or audio tape 
recording device, photographing device, or any other electronic or 
mechanical device designed for similar purposes is prohibited at ASC 
meetings.

    Dated: November 30, 2012.
James R. Park,
Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 2012-29481 Filed 12-5-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
```
<PAGE>
                                                                     EXHIBIT 32


                             EMS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.


                                CERTIFICATION OF

                            CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

                                      AND

                            CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


         Each of the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer of EMS Technologies, Inc. hereby individually certifies that the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended June 28,
2003, to which this Certification is attached, fully complies with the
requirements of Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and that the information contained in such Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of EMS
Technologies, Inc.

         In witness whereof, each of the undersigned has executed and delivered
this Certification on this 12th day of August, 2003.


/s/ Alfred G. Hansen                     /s/ Don T. Scartz
------------------------------           --------------------------------------
Alfred G. Hansen                         Don T. Scartz
Chief Executive Officer                  Chief Financial Officer
EMS Technologies, Inc.                   EMS Technologies, Inc.
§ 219.109 IRB review of research. ( a ) An IRB shall review and have authority to approve, require modifications in (to secure approval), or disapprove all research activities covered by this policy, including exempt research activities under § 219.104 for which limited IRB review is a condition of exemption (under § 219.104(d)(2)(iii), (d)(3)(i)(C), and (d)(7), and (8)).
( b ) An IRB shall require that information given to subjects (or legally authorized representatives, when appropriate) as part of informed consent is in accordance with § 219.116. The IRB may require that information, in addition to that specifically mentioned in § 219.116, be given to the subjects when in the IRB's judgment the information would meaningfully add to the protection of the rights and welfare of subjects.
( c ) An IRB shall require documentation of informed consent or may waive documentation in accordance with § 219.117.
( d ) An IRB shall notify investigators and the institution in writing of its decision to approve or disapprove the proposed research activity, or of modifications required to secure IRB approval of the research activity. If the IRB decides to disapprove a research activity, it shall include in its written notification a statement of the reasons for its decision and give the investigator an opportunity to respond in person or in writing.
( e ) An IRB shall conduct continuing review of research requiring review by the convened IRB at intervals appropriate to the degree of risk, not less than once per year, except as described in § 219.109(f).
( f ) ( 1 ) Unless an IRB determines otherwise, continuing review of research is not required in the following circumstances: ( i ) Research eligible for expedited review in accordance with § 219.110;
( ii ) Research reviewed by the IRB in accordance with the limited IRB review described in § 219.104(d)(2)(iii), (d)(3)(i)(C), or (d)(7) or (8);
( iii ) Research that has progressed to the point that it involves only one or both of the following, which are part of the IRB-approved study: ( A ) Data analysis, including analysis of identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens, or
( B ) Accessing follow-up clinical data from procedures that subjects would undergo as part of clinical care.
( 2 ) [Reserved]
( g ) An IRB shall have authority to observe or have a third party observe the consent process and the research.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under Control Number 0990-0260)
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         January 7, 2021.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 28, 2020, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail & Parcel Select Contract 5 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2021-56, CP2021-58.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2020-29308 Filed 1-6-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P