alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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.                  

###### Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

Pursuant to the provisions of the “Government in the Sunshine Act” (5 U.S.C. 552b), notice is hereby given that at 9:32 a.m. on Tuesday, November 9, 2010, the Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation met in closed session to consider matters related to the Corporation's supervision, corporate and resolution activities.

In calling the meeting, the Board determined, on motion of Director John E. Bowman (Acting Director, Office of Thrift Supervision), seconded by Director John G. Walsh (Acting Comptroller of the Currency), concurred in by Vice Chairman Martin J. Gruenberg, Director Thomas J. Curry (Appointive), and Chairman Sheila C. Bair, that Corporation business required its consideration of the matters which were to be the subject of this meeting on less than seven days' notice to the public; that no earlier notice of the meeting was practicable; that the public interest did not require consideration of the matters in a meeting open to public observation; and that the matters could be considered in a closed meeting by authority of subsections (c)(2), (c)(4), (c)(6), (c)(8), (c)(9)(A)(ii), (c)(9)(B), and (c)(10) of the “Government in the Sunshine Act” (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2), (c)(4), (c)(6), (c)(8), (c)(9)(A)(ii), (c)(9)(B), and (c)(10)).

The meeting was held in the Board Room of the FDIC Building located at 550—17th Street, NW., Washington, DC.

Dated: November 9, 2010.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

Robert E. Feldman,

Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2010-28629 Filed 11-9-10; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE P
**Michigan Supreme Court** 

**Lansing, Michigan**

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

October 17, 2014

p1014 

# Order

Clerk October 17, 2014

150083

SC: 150083

In re W. N. JOHNSON, Minor

. COA: 320222

Wayne CC Family Division:

10

- 496636

- NA

_______________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 21, 2014

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in

lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for

further proceedings. On remand, while retaining jurisdiction, the Court of Appeals shall

remand this case to the Wayne Circuit Court, Family Division, to conduct a continued

best

- interests hearing ba sed on updated information regarding the respondent and the

minor child. At the conclusion of the hearing, the circuit court shall forward the record

and its finding as to the child’s best interests to the Court of Appeals, which shall then

resolve the is sues presented by the respondent. In the event that the respondent is not

aggrieved by the circuit court’s decision, the respondent shall file a motion or signed

stipulation to dismiss the appeal. See MCR 7.218.

We do not retain jurisdiction.
#### MARTUCCI v. MAYER et al.

No. 11179.

United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit.

Argued Jan. 19,1954.

Decided Jan. 22, 1954.

*260John Edward Sheridan, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellant.

Oliver C. Biddle, Washington, D. C. (Warren E. Burger, Asst. Atty. Gen., Edward H. Hickey, Atty., Department of Justice, Washington, D. C., on the brief), for appellees.

. Before McLAUGHLIN, KALODNER and STALEY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, a Deputy Collector for the Director of Internal Revenue of the First District of Pennsylvania, was ordered suspended for a period of ninety days by the United States Civil Service Commission for an alleged violation of Section 9(a) of the Hatch Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C.A. § 118i(a). For the purpose of setting aside the Commission’s order Martucci filed a petition for review of that order together with a petition for a temporary injunction. Personal service was effected upon Martucci’s superior, the local Director of Internal Revenue, and the Commission was served by registered mail in the District of Columbia.

The temporary injunction having been granted until the petition for review could be heard, appellees moved to dismiss the action and dissolve the restraining order on the ground that the court lacked jurisdiction' over indispensable parties as well as over the subject matter of the suit. Reliance was placed, inter alia, on the décision of Blackmar v. Guerre, 342 U.S. 512, 72 S.Ct. 410, 96 L.Ed. 534, which held that a suit challenging the action of the Commission must be brought against the individual Commissioners as members of that body. Appellees later moved for summary judgment, under Rule 56, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C., alleging that there was no dispute of fact and that they were entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Both motions were argued together. The district court granted summary judgment in appellees’ favor, the accompanying opinion holding that under Blackmar v. Guerre, supra, the individual members of the Commission being indispensable parties and not before the court, there was an absence of jurisdiction. The local Director of Internal Revenue under the Commissioner’s Reorganization Order No. 7 had no authority to suspend appellant for longer than a period of five days, and then only as a disciplinary measure for infractions of office rules and practices.

Although we are in entire agreement with the basis of the lower court’s decision, it is our view that an order of dismissal, not summary judgment, should have been entered in this case. A judgment under Rule 56 goes to the merits and operates in bar of the cause of action, not in abatement. Moore’s Federal Practice (2nd edit.), Paragraph 56.03; Jones v. Brush, 9 Cir., 1944, 143 F.2d 733; Central Mexico Light & Power Co. v. Munch, 2 Cir., 1940, 116 F.2d 85. Here, however, as is clear from the district court’s opinion, the claim has *not been*disposed of on *261the merits and is therefore only abated.

The judgment will be vacated and the cause remanded with directions to enter an order dismissing the action for want of jurisdiction.
EXHIBIT 99.1



INNOVA PURE WATER, INC.

SENIOR FINANCIAL OFFICERS

CODE OF ETHICS



GENERAL PHILOSOPHY



The chief executive officer and the chief financial officer (collectively "Senior Financial Officers") are responsible for the integrity of Innova, Inc. ("Innova") financial reporting and system of internal accounting and controls.  The honesty, integrity and sound judgment of each Senior Financial Officer is fundamental to the reputation and success of Innova.



While all employees, officers, and directors are required to adhere to the Innova Code of Ethics, the professional and ethical conduct of Senior Financial Officers is essential to the proper function and success of Innova.



SENIOR FINANCIAL OFFICERS CODE OF ETHICS



To the best of their knowledge, each Senior Financial Officer of Innova must:



(i)

Act with honesty and integrity, avoid actual or apparent conflicts of interest in personal and professional relationships.



(ii)

Not put their personal interests ahead of the interests of Innova or its shareholders.



(iii)

Provide colleagues with information that is accurate, complete, objective, relevant, timely and understandable.



(iv)

Comply with applicable laws, rules and regulations of federal, state and local governments (both United States and foreign) and other appropriate private and public regulatory agencies.



(v)

Act in good faith, with due care, competence and diligence, without misrepresenting material facts or allowing independent judgment to be subordinated.



(vi)

Respect the confidentiality of information acquired in the course of employment.



(vii)

Share knowledge and maintain skills necessary and relevant to Innova's needs.



(viii)

Proactively promote ethical and honest behavior within the Innova environment.



(ix)

Assure responsible use of and control of all assets, resources and information of Innova.



Each Senior Financial Officer is expected to adhere to the Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers at all times.  The board of directors shall have the sole and absolute authority to approve any deviation or waiver from the Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers.  Any waiver and the grounds for such waiver for a Senior Financial Officer shall be promptly disclosed through a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Form 8-K.  Additionally, any change of this Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers shall be promptly disclosed to shareholders.
#### § 1780.54 Technical services.

Owners are responsible for providing the engineering, architect and environmental services necessary for planning, designing, bidding, contracting, inspecting, and constructing their facilities. Services may be provided by the owner's “in house” engineer or architect or through contract, subject to Agency concurrence. Engineers and architects must be licensed in the State where the facility is to be constructed.
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-QSB/A of Intelligentias, Inc. (the Company) for the three months ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Ian Rice, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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.



By:

/s/ IAN RICE

Ian Rice





September 10, 2007
#### In the Matter of Zvi Lazar, Petitioner, v Nathaniel T. Helman, Respondent.

Application unanimously denied, and the petition dismissed as frivolous. Respondent shall recover of petitioner $75 costs and disbursements of this proceeding. No opinion. Concur—Fein, J. P., Sullivan, Lupiano, Silverman and Bloom, JJ.
<XBRL>
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="us-ascii"?>
<!--XBRL document created with Toppan Merrill Bridge  10.2.5.9 -->
<!--Based on XBRL 2.1-->
<!--Created on: 5/3/2023 1:50:28 PM-->
<!--Modified on: 5/3/2023 1:50:28 PM-->
<xsd:schema targetNamespace="http://nl.com/20230503" attributeFormDefault="unqualified" elementFormDefault="qualified" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:currency="http://xbrl.sec.gov/currency/2022" xmlns:dei="http://xbrl.sec.gov/dei/2022" xmlns:us-roles="http://fasb.org/us-roles/2022" xmlns:ref="http://www.xbrl.org/2006/ref" xmlns:xbrldt="http://xbrl.org/2005/xbrldt" xmlns:xl="http://www.xbrl.org/2003/XLink" xmlns:sic="http://xbrl.sec.gov/sic/2022" xmlns:us-types="http://fasb.org/us-types/2022" xmlns:srt-roles="http://fasb.org/srt-roles/2022" xmlns:stpr="http://xbrl.sec.gov/stpr/2022" xmlns:utr="http://www.xbrl.org/2009/utr" xmlns:us-gaap="http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2022" xmlns:link="http://www.xbrl.org/2003/linkbase" xmlns:srt-types="http://fasb.org/srt-types/2022" xmlns:exch="http://xbrl.sec.gov/exch/2022" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:naics="http://xbrl.sec.gov/naics/2022" xmlns:country="http://xbrl.sec.gov/country/2022" xmlns:negated="http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/negated" xmlns:attributeFormDefault="unqualified" xmlns:xbrli="http://www.xbrl.org/2003/instance" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:srt="http://fasb.org/srt/2022" xmlns:enum2="http://xbrl.org/2020/extensible-enumerations-2.0" xmlns:dtr-types="http://www.xbrl.org/dtr/type/2020-01-21" xmlns:deprecated="http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/deprecated" xmlns:net="http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/net" xmlns:nl="http://nl.com/20230503" xmlns:dtr="http://www.xbrl.org/2009/dtr" xmlns:cef="http://xbrl.sec.gov/cef/2022" xmlns:xbrldi="http://xbrl.org/2006/xbrldi">
  <xsd:annotation>
    <xsd:appinfo>
      <link:roleType roleURI="http://nl.com/role/DocumentDocumentAndEntityInformation" id="DocumentDocumentAndEntityInformation">
        <link:definition>00090 - Document - Document and Entity Information</link:definition>
        <link:usedOn>link:presentationLink</link:usedOn>
        <link:usedOn>link:calculationLink</link:usedOn>
        <link:usedOn>link:definitionLink</link:usedOn>
      </link:roleType>
      <link:linkbaseRef xlink:type="simple" xlink:href="nl-20230503_pre.xml" xlink:role="http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationLinkbaseRef" xlink:arcrole="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink/properties/linkbase" />
      <link:linkbaseRef xlink:type="simple" xlink:href="nl-20230503_lab.xml" xlink:role="http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/labelLinkbaseRef" xlink:arcrole="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink/properties/linkbase" />
    </xsd:appinfo>
  </xsd:annotation>
  <xsd:import namespace="http://www.xbrl.org/2003/instance" schemaLocation="http://www.xbrl.org/2003/xbrl-instance-2003-12-31.xsd" />
  <xsd:import namespace="http://xbrl.org/2005/xbrldt" schemaLocation="http://www.xbrl.org/2005/xbrldt-2005.xsd" />
  <xsd:import namespace="http://xbrl.sec.gov/dei/2022" schemaLocation="https://xbrl.sec.gov/dei/2022/dei-2022.xsd" />
</xsd:schema>
</XBRL>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-6409

WILLIAM LEE SWANN,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

SEWALL SMITH; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF

MARYLAND,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-98-

387-L)

Submitted: April 29, 1998 Decided: May 18, 1998

Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William Lee Swann, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying

relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court's

opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning

of the district court. Swann v. Smith, No. CA-98-387-L (D. Md. Feb.

25, 1998). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before

the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### Shirley E. Garshman *v.*Norman Ebenstein, Executor

*Harry L. Nair,*for the appellee (plaintiff).

*John J. Langenbach,*for the appellant (defendant).

Argued April 6

decided April 6, 1971

The motion by the plaintiff to dismiss the purported appeal from the Superior Court in Hartford County is granted.
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -  Announcements 
            -           Webinar Recording: Preventing Fentanyl Use by Youth and Young Adults      

# Webinar Recording: Preventing Fentanyl Use by Youth and Young Adults

This webinar explored how fentanyl use as well as fentanyl laced with other substances such as xylazine is a growing threat to young people. Federal leaders spoke about agencies’ drug misuse prevention efforts, interventions, programming, and public awareness campaigns. **Learn more.**
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 21-0232

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

SEAN MCKELVEY CALAHAN,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

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

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including September 30, 2022, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 24 2022

08/24/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0232
§ 1751.103 Loan and loan advance requirements. ( a ) For information about loan eligibility requirements in relation to the Modernization Plan, see 7 CFR part 1735. In particular, beginning February 13, 1996, RUS will make RUS hardship and RUS cost-of-money loans for facilities and other RE Act purposes in a State only if: ( 1 ) The State has an RUS approved Modernization Plan; and
( 2 ) The Borrower to whom the loan is to be made is participating in the Modernization Plan for the State. A Borrower is considered to be participating if, in RUS's opinion, the purposes of the loan requested by the Borrower are consistent with the Borrower achieving the requirements stated in the Modernization Plan within the timeframe stated in the Modernization Plan unless RUS has determined that achieving the requirements is not technically or economically feasible.
( b ) With regard to the three types of loans discussed in paragraph (a), only loans approved after the date the State has an RUS approved Modernization Plan are subject to complying with the Modernization Plan.
( c ) For loans subject to complying with the Modernization Plan, advances will not be made if, in RUS's opinion, the advances are not consistent with achieving the requirements of the Modernization Plan.
[60 FR 8174, Feb. 13, 1995, as amended at 84 FR 59923, Nov. 7, 2019]
#### §§ 1774.25-1774.99 [Reserved]
#### § 1714.2 Definitions.

The definitions set forth in 7 CFR 1710.2 are applicable to this part, unless otherwise stated. References to specific RUS forms and other RUS documents, and to specific sections of such forms and documents, shall include the corresponding forms, documents, sections and lines in any subsequent revisions of these forms and documents.
#### Murden et al. *vs.*Everage *&c.*

Chakceut, <ijasel81.

Error to the Simpson Ciicuit; Graham, Judge.

*Slaves. Husband and wife. Glioses in action of wife.*

Under will of record m Va. tied to a share of slaves, in^r inia'*11 withthcex*621eoutor until ador the dentil of the wife, decided that, it not appearing to ¡lie court that there is any law in Virginia similar to the statute of(his stale which would make the slaves pass directly to the legatees or otherwise than as personalty, therefore the husband cannot, after death of his wife, maintain a suit, *in his own name,*to recover his wife’s shaie of the slaves.-

*620October 24.

Judge Nicholas

d.-livcrcd the opinion of the couri.

The wife of Everage, previous to marriage, was entitled, as legatee of her grandfather, to a s[lare 0f four ¿laves. The grandfather resided and died hi Virginia, where the slaves remained in the possession of the executor until some time after death of Mrs Everage, when they were deliveretl by the executor' to two of her co-legatees, *621and by them brought to this state. This.suit in chancery was brought by Everage to obtain partition of the slaves.

*Crittenden,*for plaintiffs ; *Monroe,*for defendant.-

The only question presented for .-consideration is, whether he can maintain the suit in his own name, and if it should not have been brought by the administrator of his wife.

We'think it can only he maintained by the administrator. *Marriage*is only a qualified gift to the husband of the wile’s *choscs*in action, — that is, upon condition that he reduce them to possession during its continuance. If he die without having reduced them to possession, they survive to his wife, and do not pass to his personal representative... So, on the other hand, if she die before him, they do not survive to him, but pass to her administrator. Crozier vs. Gano, IV Bibb, 175.

Legacies or bequests of personal property are literally and stic-.ly *chores*in action, within the meaning and operation of this rule. See I Roper on Property, 201. Whether general or specific, they transfer only an inchoate property to the legatee. To render the right absolute and perfect, the assent of the executor is indispensable. Toller oh Executors, 306.

We know judicially of no law of Virginia, similar to the statute of this state, which would make the slaves pass by the will directly to the legatees, or otherwise than as personalty.

Decree reversed, with costs, and cause remanded, with directions to dismiss the hill.
# LAW OFFICE '!'JOHN MIET17S, LLC 6701 DEMoCRAcY E30ULEVARD, SLIITE 300 QE ✓ TI-IESDA, MD 20817-7500 ]OHN R. MIEilJS, JR. (202) 747-5212 jolin@mietuslaw.com

June 4, 2015 

### BY ELECTRONIC MAIL Mr. Brett Kruger Office of International Aviation U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington DC 20590 Re: Docket OST-2015-0122, Application of Sky Lease I, Inc. (U.S.-Hong Kong) Dear Mr. I ,

C-ruger: Sky Lease has completed their poll of the U.S. carriers served on June 2, 2015 with the above-captioned application. There were no objections. As Sky Lease wishes to proceed with licensing procedures in Hong Kong for suininer operations, it `vould appreciate eYpedited Department action on the application. Respectfully submitted,

~ John R. Mietus, Jr. Counsel for Sky Lease I, Inc.
Exhibit 23.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-3 (File
No. 333-164400) and in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-82292, 333-131656, 333-143272,
333-148682 and 333-159938) of AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Inc. of our report dated February 26, 2010 relating to the financial statements and the effectiveness of
internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K.

/s/ PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP Boston, Massachusetts
February 26, 2010


---



QuickLinks