alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Jayce Hafner Domestic Policy Analyst The Episcopal Church Jhafner@episcopalchurch.org

Itwas the end ofthe arctic summerwhen Charlie first showed me the cracks in the tundra. Charlie is a hunter in the Arctic Village ofAlaska, a Gwich'in settlement so remote that itcan only be reached by plane. I am a policy analystforThe Episcopal Church, and was visiting Charlie's village to reconnect with the Gwich'in community, a native people with whom The Episcopal Church has enjoyed a longstanding relationship. Like the rest of his village, Charlie depends on caribou meat to survive, and he offered to take me to his hunting ground: the pristine Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Charlie showed me whatthe scientific community considers visible effects ofclimate change. From his hunting boat, he indicated awide swath ofcollapsed riverbank, tumbled spruce trees tangled in asink hole. Once on the tundra, he pointed to large, ominous cracks in the land, two inches wide and spreading across the plain. Charlie simply said: "The permafrost is melting." Next, he showed me forests ofwillows, atree species unknown to grow in the Refuge before now. "The caribou's horns catch in the willow's branches", he said. "They can't getthrough, and are changing their migration path away from our hunting grounds." "Ifthe caribou don'tcome through," Iasked, "Howwill you eatthis winter?" Charlie shrugged. He did not know. Climate change is one ofthe great moral issues ofourtime, and scientific evidence points to carbon pollution as a driving force behind it. According to researchers at Stanford University, ifunchecked, carbon pollution could lead to 21,000 climate change related deaths. We already see these tragedies occurring around the world: displacing populations, sickening children, and rendering species and cultures nearly extinct. Inspired by the growing body ofevidence demonstrating that atransition to a low-carbon society is both feasible and economical, and equipped withthe knowledge that carbon plants contribute to 40% of carbon pollution causing climate change, The Episcopal Church supports carbon pollution protectionsfor existing power plants. We thank you foryour attention tothis issue and urge swift action to finalize the Clean Power Plan Proposed Rule, emphasizing ashiftto renewable energy ratherthan atransition to lower carbon fossil fuels. We ask this on behalfofour congregations on the coastlines who are still recovering from devastating hurricanes, forthose on the plains and deserts who sufferfrom harsher summers and winters every year, and for all communities who bearthe undue burden ofclimate change. Finally, we ask this on behalf ofour brothers and sisters in the Arctic, so that come winter, Charlie and his village can survive.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         336,832
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                92,346
<PP&E>                                       4,893,753
<DEPRECIATION>                             (2,065,873)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,257,058
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          428,498
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,828,560
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,257,058
<SALES>                                        422,558
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               422,558
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               356,642
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 65,916
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             65,916
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    65,916
<EPS-BASIC>                                        7.1
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of J. Madison Raynor, Respondent, v. Yardarm Club Hotel, Inc., et al., Appellants.

In a proceeding (1) to restrain appellant Richard Whitney, the -president and principal stockholder of appellant Yardarm Club Hotel, Inc., from paying out corporate funds to himself, his family and to others, including personal creditors and (2) to permit petitioner and his accountant to inspect books and records of the appellant corporation and to make copies and extracts thereof, the appeal is from so much of an order of the 'Supreme Court, 'Suffolk 'County, dated July 31, 1968, as granted the application to the extent of permitting petitioner and his accountant to inspect the books and records of the corporation from January 1, 1962 to “ the present date’’, and to make copies and extracts thereof at petitioner’s own cost and expense. Order affirmed, insofar as appealed from, with $10 costs and disbursements. In our opinion, even if we were to go so far as to assume that there is an issue of fact present as to petitioner’s good faith in instituting this proceeding, the hunden would not be on him to demonstrate -his good faith but *789on the appellant corporation to show his bad faith (5 Fletcher, Cyclopedia Corporations [Perm, ed.], § 2220, pp. 816-817; *Matter of Tate*v. *Sonotone Corp.,*272 App. Div. 103). However, since the affidavits submitted by appellants in opposition to the proceeding completely failed to refute his allegations that they had violated several provisions of the Business Corporation Law (e.g., § 602, subd. [b], which requires annual meetings of shareholders, and appellants have held but one such meeting in the last six years; § 703, subd. [a], which requires that directors be elected at each annual shareholders’ meeting, to hold office until the next annual meeting, and there is no indication in the affidavits that any such elections have been held in the six-year period in question), in our opinion 'Special Term did not abuse its discretion in granting the petition to the indicated extent (Business Corporation Law, § 624, subd. [d]; cf. *Matter of Ochs*v. *Washington Hgts. Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn.,*17 N Y 2d 82, 86; *Matter of Cohen*v. *Cocoline Prods.,*309 N. Y. 119; *Matter of Breswick & Co.*v. *Greater N. Y. Inds.,*308 N. Y. 1041; *Matter of Steinway,*159 N. Y. 250; *Mafter of Gottdenker*v. *Philadelphia & Reading Corp.,*31 A D 2d 152; *Matter of Tate*v. *Sonotone Corp.,*272 App. Div. 103, supra; *Matter of Schulman*v. *Dejonge & Co.,*270 App. Div. 147; *Matter of Young*v. *Columbia Broadcasting System,*28 Misc 2d 512). Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Hopkins, Munder and Martuscello, JJ., concur.
Subpart 627.2—Patents and Copyrights

Parent topic: PART 627—PATENTS, DATA, AND COPYRIGHTS

627.201 Patent and copyright infringement liability.

627.201-2 Contract clauses.

(e) The Procurement Executive is the agency head's designee for the purposes of FAR 27.201–2(e).
EXHIBIT 32  NEXGEN APPLIED SOLUTIONS INC.   Certification of the Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer 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 accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K, Amendment No. 1, of Nexgen Applied Solutions Inc. (the Company) for the year ended March 31, 2016 (the Report), I, Robert Coleridge, President and Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.   September 2, 2016 /s/ Robert ColeridgePrincipal Executive Officer and
Principal Financial Officer
§ 760.13 Application for payment of cows. ( a ) Any affected farmer may apply for cow indemnity under §§ 760.10 and 760.11. To apply for DIPP for affected cows, the affected farmer must sign and file an application for payment on a form that is approved for that purpose by the Deputy Administrator and provide the information described in § 760.12.
( b ) The form must be filed with the FSA county office for the county where the farm headquarters is located by December 31 following the fiscal year end in which the affected farmer's milk was removed from the commercial market, except that affected farmers that have received 3 months of milk indemnity payments prior to December 13, 2021, must file the form within 120 days after December 13, 2021. Upon written request from an affected farmer and at Deputy Administrator's discretion, the deadline for that affected farmer may be extended.
[86 FR 70705, Dec. 13, 2021]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION DERIVED FROM THE
QUATERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-QSB AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL INFORMATION.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                       3,070,532
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          11,918
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 13,279,102
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                     83,304,709
<ALLOWANCE>                                    803,284
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             105,670,342
<DEPOSITS>                                  89,789,272
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          2,755,075
<LONG-TERM>                                  5,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     3,483,870
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,890,506
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             105,670,342
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              1,735,941
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              174,138
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                12,578
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             1,922,657
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             861,024
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             965,879
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          956,778
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   90,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                870,093
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                165,386
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     165,386
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   120,033
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.17
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.10
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                   134,000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                              4,452,000
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               719,788
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   30,000
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              803,284
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           800,403
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          2,880
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Matt J. Colbert, Chief Financial Officer of Gold Crest Mines, Inc. (the Registrant) do 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 my knowledge:



1.

This annual report on Form 10-K of the Registrant for the year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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 results of operations of the Registrant.



Date:  March 16, 2011



/s/        Matt J. Colbert_____

Matt J. Colbert

Chief Financial Officer
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

JAMES COWAN, #243426, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06cv684-MHT

) (WO)

S. E. WILSON, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER

There being no objections filed to the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge filed

herein on August 14, 2006 (doc. no. 4), said Recommendation is adopted, and it is the

ORDER, JUDGMENT and DECREE of the court that:

1. The claim presented against defendant Nonie M. Robinson is DISMISSED

with prejudice in accordance with the directives of 28 U.S.C.

§1915(e)(2)(B)(i).

2. The claim against defendant S. E. Wilson is DISMISSED with prejudice

pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) as Cowan failed to

file the complaint within the time prescribed by the applicable period of

limitations. 

Case 2:06-cv-00684-MHT-SRW Document 5 Filed 09/25/2006 Page 1 of 2
3. This case is DISMISSED with prejudice prior to service of process under 28

U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).

DONE, this the 25th day of September, 2006.

 /s/ Myron H. Thompson 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00684-MHT-SRW Document 5 Filed 09/25/2006 Page 2 of 2
#### Gerald Frascelli, Petitioner, v. Donald S. Hostetter, as Chairman of New York State Liquor Authority, et al., Respondents.

Proceeding under CPLR article 78 to annul respondent’s determination, dated May 20, 1968, which suspended petitioner’s on-premises liquor license for 10 days and demanded payment of petitioner’s $1,000 bond on the ground that petitioner had suffered or permitted gambling on the licensed premises, in violation of subdivision 6 of section 106 of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Law. Determination modified, on the law, by striking out the demand for payment of the bond, and confirmed as so modified, without costs. No questions of fact were considered. In our opinion the provision for payment of the bond as an additional penalty was excessive. Hnder all the circumstances, the penalty should have been limited to a suspension of the license for a period of 10 days. Christ, Acting P. J., Rabin, Benjamin, Munder and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.
DISMISS and Opinion Filed August 7, 2014 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00587-CV 

LARRY MILLER ROOFING, INC., Appellant 

V. 

PAUL YOUNG ASSOCIATES II, L.P., Appellee 

On Appeal from the 95th Judicial District Court 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. DC-13-06684 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Chief Justice Wright and Justices Lang-Miers and Brown 

Opinion by Chief Justice Wright 

Before the Court is appellant’s motion to dismiss the appeal. Appellant has informed the 

Court that the parties have settled their differences. Accordingly, we grant appellant’s motion 

and dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1). 

140587F.P05 

 

/Carolyn Wright/ 

CAROLYN WRIGHT 

CHIEF JUSTICE 
 –2– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

LARRY MILLER ROOFING, INC., 

Appellant 

No. 05-14-00587-CV V. 

PAUL YOUNG ASSOCIATES II, L.P., 

Appellee 

 On Appeal from the 95th Judicial District 

Court, Dallas County, Texas. 

Trial Court Cause No. DC-13-06684. 

Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright. 

Justices Lang-Miers and Brown, 

participating. 

 In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED. 

 Subject to any agreement between the parties, it is ORDERED that appellee, PAUL 

YOUNG ASSOCIATES II, L.P., recover its costs of this appeal from appellant, LARRY 

MILLER ROOFING, INC.. 

Judgment entered August 7, 2014
# Subpart 1304.2 - Contract Distribution

**Parent topic:**PART 1304 - ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS

## 1304.201 Procedures.

## 1304.201-70 Accountable personal property.

Provide one copy of all contracts and purchase orders for accountable personal property to the appropriate Departmental property management office(s) for inclusion in the Department's personal property system in accordance with the DOC Personal Property Management Manual. Accountable personal property purchased with a Governmentwide commercial purchase card is also to be reported to the property management office.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

September 28, 2009 

d0921 

Order 

 

September 28, 2009 

136595 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 136595 

 COA: 274235 

Shiawassee CC: 06-003593-FC 

JEREMY DAVID STUCKEY, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 By order of April 1, 2009, the application for leave to appeal the April 10, 2008 

judgment of the Court of Appeals was held in abeyance pending the decision in People v 

Idziak (Docket No. 137301). On order of the Court, the case having been decided on July 

31, 2009, 484 Mich 549 (2009), the application is again considered, and it is DENIED, 

because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this 

Court. 

 KELLY, C.J., would grant leave to appeal for the reasons set forth in her opinion in 

People v Idziak, 484 Mich 549 (2009). 

 CAVANAGH, J., would grant leave to appeal to reconsider People v Idziak, 484 

Mich 549 (2009).
### Federal Air Quality Control Regions, EPA, 1972 (This document can be viewed at:

http://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/P10053PA.TXT?ZyActionD=ZyDocument&Client=EPA&Index=Prior+to+19 76&Docs=&Query=&T ime=&EndTime=&SearchMethod=1&TocRestrict=n&Toc=&TocEntry=&QField=&QField Year=&QFieldMonth=&QFieldDay=&IntQFieldOp=0&ExtQFieldOp=0&XmlQuery=&File=D%3A%5Czyfiles%5 CIndex%20Data%5C70thru75%5CTxt%5C00000006%5CP10053PA.txt&User=ANONYMOUS&Password=anony
mous&Sort Method=h%7C

- &MaximumDocuments=1&FuzzyDegree=0&ImageQuality=r75g8/r75g8/x150y150g16/i425&Display=p%7Cf&De fSeekPage=x&SearchBack=ZyActionL&Back=ZyActionS&BackDesc=Results%20page&MaximumPages=1&ZyE ntry=1&SeekPage=x&ZyPURL
**EXHIBIT 31.2** **CERTIFICATION**     I, James T. Rens, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on    Form 10-K/A    of CVR Energy, Inc.;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any    untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material    fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the    circumstances under which such statements were made, not    misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and    other financial information included in this report, fairly    present in all material respects the financial condition,    results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of,    and for, the periods presented in this report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are    responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls    and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act    Rules 13a-15(e)    and    15d-15(e))    for the registrant and have:     a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or    caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed    under our supervision, to ensure that material information    relating to the registrant, including its consolidated    subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those    entities, particularly during the period in which this report is    being prepared;     b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s    disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report    our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure    controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by    this report based on such evaluation; and     c) Disclosed in this report any change in the    registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that    occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter    (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an    annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably    likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal    control over financial reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I    have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal    control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s    auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board    of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):     a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in    the design or operation of internal control over financial    reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the    registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and    report financial information; and     b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves    management or other employees who have a significant role in the    registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        Date: May 8, 2008     By: /s/  James    T. Rens
#### Rosella Swerdzewski, as Administratrix of the Estate of Frank A. Swerdzewski, Deceased, Appellant, v. Incorporated Village of Westhampton Beach, Respondent.

In an action to recover damages for wrongful death, plaintiff appeals from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered October 11, 1968, in her favor after a nonjury trial on the issues of damages, as limited the award of damages to $200,000 plus $1,308 for funeral expenses, with interest at 3%. Judgment modified, on the law and the facts, by increasing the rate of interest to 4%. As so modified, judgment afBrmed insofar as appealed from, without costs, and ease remitted to the trial court for entry by its clerk of an amended judgment in conformity herewith. In our opinion, in the light of changing market conditions from the date of *564the decedent’s death in July, 1958, until the entry of judgment in October, 1968, the trial court abused its discretion in not awarding the maximum rate of interest permitted by statute during that period (General Municipal Law, § 3-a, subd. *2;*see *People ex rel. Emigrant Ind. Sav. Bank*v. *Sexton,*259 App. Div. 566, affd. 284 N. Y. 57). Rabin, Acting P. J., Hopkins, Munder, Martuscello and Benjamin, JJ., concur.