alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IC Burden Analysis Table (XXXX) XXXX-XXXX vX

**Please enter Name of Instrument here.**

**Respondent Type # of Respondents** **# of Responses Hours/Response** **Total Burden Hours**  **Reporting Requirement Cost per**  **Repondent Total Costs** 

**per Respondent**  **Burden by Affected Entity:** Federal Government 0 0 0 0 $0 $0

Individuals or Households 0 0 0 0 $0 $0

Farms 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 **Sub-total** 0 0 0 $0

**Private Sector** Business or other for-profits 0 0 0 0 $0 $0

Not-for profits 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 **Sub-total** 0 0 0 $0

**State, Local, or Tribal Governments** Public Institutions 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 Private Institutions 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 **Sub-total** 0 0 0 0

**Total** 

### 0 **0 0**  **$0**

**CURRENT INVENTORY** Current # of Respondents 0 Current # of Responses 0 Current Inventory of Hours 0 Difference 

### 0 **0 0** 

Document Type Available Electronically? Can be submitted Electronically? Percent Reporting Electronically? Obligation to Respond? Frequency?

Revised: XX/XX/XXXX 1IC Burden Analysis Table (XXXX) XXXX-XXXX vX

IC Title **Af fected**  **Public Reporting** 

**Requirement Av** **ailable**

**Electronically Can be** 

**Submitted Electronically**  **Percent**

**Reporting Electronically** **Electronic**

**Capability Obligation to** 

**Respond # of** 

**Respondents # of** 

**Responses Hrs/Resp**  **Total Hours**

MIL Individua

ls or Househ olds Reporting Yes No 0%Fillable Printable Required to Obtain or Retain a Benefit 16000 16000 0.5 8000

SCRA Individua

ls or Househ olds Reporting Yes No 0%Fillable PrintableVoluntary 4708 4708 0.25 1177 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 

### Total 20,708 20,708 9,177

**CURRENT INVENTORY** Current # of Respondents 16,000 Current # of Responses 16,000 Current Inventory

of Hours 8,000

Revised XX/XX/XXXX 1IC Burden Analysis Table (XXXX) XXXX-XXXX vX

**Difference** 4,708 4,708 1,177

IC Title Instrument Filename Frequency Number of Respondents Cost Per

Respondent Total Cost

Per Respondent On Occasion 16000 $0.46 $7,360 On Occasion 4708 $0.46 $2,166 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 MIL SCRA

Revised XX/XX/XXXX 2IC Burden Analysis Table (XXXX) XXXX-XXXX vX
$0 $0 $0 **Total Costs** $9,526

Revised XX/XX/XXXX 3
#### Castleman *against*Castleman.

Chancery.

[Mr. Owsley for plaintiff: Messrs. Sanders and Depew, and Mr. Lyle for defendant.]

From the Circuit Court for.Gallatin County.

*November*3.

The county in which a person has his domicil and property, is the only proper place for an inquisition as to the state of his mind, and so the nature and perty; and for the appointment and control of a committee. And in any stage of such a proceeding, even after the appointment of a committee-while the case remains control of the court — upon its being shown that the lunatic has been removed from his home and his county, for the purpose of an inquisition, the whole proceedings should be annulled, by the circuit court, as they will be here.

Chief Justice Robertson

delivered the Opinion of the Court.

Upon the report to the Circuit Court of Gallatin, of an inquisition deciding that Mrs. Jemima Castleman was of unsound mind, and was possessed of property exceeding in value eighty thousand dollars — one of her sons appeared, in her behalf, and made affidavit that her home and her property were in Woodford county, where she had lived for half a century; and that she had been, as he believed, surreptitiously taken to Gallatin, only a few days prior to that time, for the fraudulent purpose of holding over her, m a strange pjace, an inquisition ot lunacy; and upon that affidavit, a motion was made to enquire into the facts stated, and thereupon to quash the inquisition; but the Circuit Judge, having just made an order for appointing a committee, refused to admit proof of the facts stated in the affidavit.

*56There was, we think, manifest error in the course pursued by the Circuit Court. The judge, as long as the case was before him, and subject to his control, should, even *ex officio,*have instituted an enquiry into the facts suggested in the affidavit. And certainly, if those facts be time, gross injustice has been done. The county where Mrs. Castleman was domiciled,’ and well known, and where all her property was situated, was the proper, and only proper place, for the inquisition as to her state of mind, and the nature and value of her estate, and for the appointment and control of a committee.

Whei'efore, the order approving the inquisition and appointing a committee, is set aside and annulled, and the case remanded for further proceedings.
§ 319.15 Notice of quarantine. ( a ) The importation into the United States of sugarcane and its related products, including cuttings, canes, leaves and bagasse, from all foreign countries and localities is prohibited, except for importations for experimental, therapeutic, or developmental purposes under the conditions specified in a controlled import permit issued in accordance with § 319.6.
( b ) The importation of sugarcane plants (including any plant parts) that are for planting or capable of being planted is restricted under Subpart H—Plants for Planting of this part.
( c ) As used in this subpart, unless the context otherwise requires, the term “United States” means the States, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands of the United States.
[24 FR 10788, Dec. 29, 1959, as amended at 66 FR 21055, Apr. 27, 2001; 78 FR 25570, May 2, 2013; 83 FR 11855, Mar. 19, 2018; 84 FR 2429, Feb. 7, 2019]
### SCPW-15-0000101

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI # I

JONATHAN PAUL BALDWIN; LYNN ANN LINDELL BALDWIN; and MOANA

PROPERTY LLC, Petitioners,

vs. THE HONORABLE RHONDA I.L. LOO, JUDGE OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT, STATE OF HAWAI # I, Respondent Judge,
and WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., AS TRUSTEE ON BEHALF OF THE HOLDERS OF THE HARBOR VIEW MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST MORTGAGE LOAN PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2006-12; MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS INC., SOLELY AS NOMINEE FOR COUNTRYWIDE BANK, N.A.; DANE S. FIELD, BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE OF THE MORTGAGE STORES, INC.; and MOANA ESTATES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, Respondents.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (Civil No. 13-1-0907(1))

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS ( B y : R e c k t e n w a l d , C

. J
. , N a k a y a m a , M c K e n n a , P o l l a c k , a n d W i l s o n , J J
. )



### Upon consideration of Petitioners Jonathan Paul Baldwin, Lynn Ann Lindell Baldwin, and Moana Property LLC’s petition for a writ of mandamus, filed on February 27, 2015, the documents attached thereto and submitted in support thereof, and the record, it appears that Petitioners fail to demonstrate that they have a clear and indisputable right to relief or that they Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-15-0000101 25-MAR-2015 10:15 AM

### lack alternative means to seek relief. Petitioners further fail

to demonstrate that the Respondent Judge exceeded her jurisdiction, committed a flagrant and manifest abuse of discretion, or refused to act on a subject properly before the court under circumstances in which she has a legal duty to act. Petitioners, therefore, are not entitled to a writ of mandamus. See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai # i 200, 204, 982 P.2d 334, 338 (1999) (a writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy that will not issue unless the petitioner demonstrates a clear and indisputable right to relief and a lack of alternative means to redress adequately the alleged wrong or obtain the requested action); Honolulu Advertiser, Inc. v. Takao, 59 Haw. 237, 241, 580 P.2d 58, 62 (1978) (a writ of mandamus is not intended to supersede the legal discretionary authority of the trial courts, cure a mere legal error, or serve as a legal remedy in lieu of normal appellate procedure; rather, it is meant to restrain a judge of an inferior court who has exceeded his or her jurisdiction, has committed a flagrant and manifest abuse of discretion, or has refused to act on a subject properly before the court under circumstances in which he or she has a legal duty to act). Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of mandamus is denied.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai # i, March 25, 2015. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack /s/ Michael D. Wilson
---

CERTIFICATION OFCHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICERPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Susan Downing, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer of Konigsberg Corporation (the Company), hereby certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

| | (i)  | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company, for
      the fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2005, and to which this
      certification is attached as Exhibit 32 (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) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.                                                                                                                                                           

| | By:    |                                  
| | ------ | ---------------------------------
| |        | /s/ Susan Downing                
| | Name:  | SUSAN DOWNING                    
| |        |                                  
| | Title: | Chief Executive Officer and Chief
| |        | Financial Officer                
| |        |                                  
| | Date:  | February 14, 2006                

A signed original of this written statement required by
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 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.

This certification accompanies the Form 10-QSB to which it
relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is
not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the
Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made
before or after the date of the Form 10-QSB), irrespective of any general
incorporation language contained in such filing.

---
#### Eileen Macupa et al., Appellants, v. Town of Bedford, Respondent.

Judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered January 12, 1965 and order of said court dated January 18, 1965 affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Brennan, Acting P. J., Rabin, Hopkins and Munder, JJ., concur; Benjamin, J. dissents and votes to reverse the judgment and the order and to grant a new trial, with the following memorandum: While deliberating, the jury requested the rereading of all the testimony of two critical witnesses. Their testimony, in full, covered almost 400 pages of the record. Pointing out the length of time that this would take, the court suggested that the jury send out a note stating just what parts of the testimony it was interested in and he would have those parts reread to it. Without again communicating with the court or repeating its request for the rereading of testimony, the jury soon thereafter returned a verdict for defendant. The court did not inquire of the jury, before taking its verdict, whether it no longer desired the rereading of any of the testimony it had earlier requested. As this was a long trial and a close ease on the facts, I believe the court’s failure to make such further inquiry of the jury, before taking its verdict, was such prejudicial error as to require a new trial in the interests of justice *(Kerner*v. *Surface Transp. Corp.,*266 App. Div. 356, affd. 293 N. Y. 881).
#### § 3550.51 Program objectives.

Section 502 of the Housing Act of 1949, as amended authorizes the Rural Housing Service (RHS) to provide financing to help low- and very low-income persons who cannot obtain credit from other sources obtain adequate housing in rural areas. Resources for the section 502 program are limited, and therefore, applicants are required to use section 502 funds in conjunction with funding or financing from other sources, if feasible. Sections 3550.52 through 3550.73 set forth the requirements for originating loans on program terms. Section 3550.74 describes the differences for originating loans on nonprogram (NP) terms.
IIB 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2600 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 27, 2013 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and 

Urban Affairs 

AN ACT 

To amend the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act 

to clarify how the Act applies to condominiums. 

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


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 2600 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. EXEMPTION FOR RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM 

2 UNITS. 

3 (a) EXEMPTION.—Section 1403 of the Interstate 

4 Land Sales Full Disclosure Act (15 U.S.C. 1702) is 

5 amended— 

6 (1) in subsection (b)— 

7 (A) in paragraph (7)(C), by striking ‘‘or’’ 

8 at the end; 

9 (B) in paragraph (8)(G), by striking the 

10 period at the end and inserting ‘‘; or’’; and 

11 (C) by adding at the end the following: 

12 ‘‘(9) the sale or lease of a condominium unit 

13 that is not exempt under subsection (a).’’; and 

14 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

15 ‘‘(d) For purposes of subsection (b), the term ‘condo16 minium unit’ means a unit of residential or commercial 

17 property to be designated for separate ownership pursuant 

18 to a condominium plan or declaration provided that upon 

19 conveyance— 

20 ‘‘(1) the owner of such unit will have sole own21 ership of the unit and an undivided interest in the 

22 common elements appurtenant to the unit; and 

23 ‘‘(2) the unit will be an improved lot.’’. 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 2600 RFS 

1 SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

2 The amendments made by this Act shall take effect 

3 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 26, 

2013. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2218 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2218

 To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain sawing machines.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 30, 2006

  Mr. DeMint introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain sawing machines.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN SAWING MACHINES.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.84.91 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to certain manufacturing 
equipment) is amended by striking ``12/31/2006'' and inserting ``12/31/
2009''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
§ 3434.7 Duration of certification. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, HSACU certification granted to an institution by the Secretary under this part shall remain valid for a period of one year.
( b ) Failure to maintain eligibility status at any time during the HSACU certification period shall result in an immediate revocation of HSACU certification.
( c ) Failure to remain in compliance with reporting requirements or adherence to any administrative or national policy requirements listed in award terms and conditions for any of the HSACU programs may result in a suspension or an immediate revocation of HSACU certification.
1... Sitting by assignment.

i i i i i i

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-08-00519-CV

Jose A. VALDEZ, Jr.,

Appellant

v.

Gustavo GUEVARA, Jr., City Secretary and The City of Laredo,

Appellees

From the 111th Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2008-CVQ-000288D2

Honorable David Peeples, Judge Presiding1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Delivered and Filed: December 23, 2008 

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION

On November 17, 2008, notice was given to the appellant that this appeal was subject to

dismissal for failing to file a brief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1). Appellant was given ten days to

explain why the cause should not be dismissed for his failure to file a brief. To date, no response

has been received. There being no satisfactory explanation for appellant’s failure to timely file the
04-08-00519-CV

-2-

brief, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. See id.; 42.3. Costs of appeal are taxed

against the appellant.

PER CURIAM
§ 319.40-4 Application for a permit to import regulated articles; issuance and withdrawal of permits. ( a ) *Application procedure.* An application for a permit must be obtained and submitted in accordance with §§ 319.7 through 319.7-5.
( b ) *Review of application and issuance of permit.* After receipt and review of the application, APHIS shall determine whether it appears that the regulated article at the time of importation will meet either the specific importation requirements in § 319.40-5 or the universal importation requirements in § 319.40-6. ( 1 ) If it appears that the regulated article proposed for importation will meet the requirements of either § 319.40-5 or § 319.40-6, a permit stating the applicable conditions for importation under this subpart shall be issued for the importation of the regulated article identified in the application.
( 2 ) If it appears that the regulated article proposed for importation will not meet the requirements of either § 319.40-5 or § 319.40-6 because these sections do not address the particular regulated article identified in the application, APHIS shall review the application by applying the plant pest risk assessment standards specified in § 319.40-11. ( i ) If this review reveals that importation of the regulated article under a permit and subject to the inspection and other requirements in § 319.40-9, but without any further conditions, will not result in the introduction of plant pests into the United States, a permit for importation of the regulated article shall be issued. The permit may only be issued in unique and unforeseen circumstances when the importation of the regulated article is not expected to recur.
( ii ) If this review reveals that the regulated article may be imported under conditions that would reduce the plant pest risk to an insignificant level, APHIS may implement rulemaking to add the additional conditions to this subpart, and after the regulations are effective, may issue a permit for importation of the regulated article.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 0579-0049) [60 FR 27674, May 25, 1995, as amended at 66 FR 21056, Apr. 27, 2001; 69 FR 52418, Aug. 26, 2004; 79 FR 19810, Apr. 10, 2014; 81 FR 40150, June 21, 2016]
#### § 3570.257 Statute and regulation references.

All references to statutes and regulations are to include any and all successor statutes and regulations.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          448010
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                448347
<PP&E>                                         4668436
<DEPRECIATION>                                 1267441
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 3849679
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           489245
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     3360434<F1>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   3849679
<SALES>                                         703232
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                703232
<CGS>                                           628697
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   628697
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               50103
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     48591
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.24<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Refers to General Partners' Capital and Limited Partners' Capital.
<F2>95% Limited Partners' - interests outstanding 20653.69
</FN>


</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.1**

**Written Statement of the Chief Executive and Acting Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  1350**

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. 1350, I, the undersigned Principal Executive Officer and Acting Principal Financial Officer of Enable IPC Corporation (the "Company"),  hereby certify, based on  my  knowledge,  that  the Quarterly  Report  on Form 10-QSB of the Company  for  the  quarter ended  December 31, 2005 (the "Report") fully complies  with  the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act  of 1934   and  that  information  contained  in  the  Report  fairly presents,  in all material respects, the financial condition  and results of operations of the Company.

Date: March 27, 2006

/s/ David A. Walker

David A. Walker 

Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial Officer