alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Good evening, and thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name 

is David Smedick and I'm with the Sierra Club. My last name is spelled 

First and foremost, I want to thank the EPA for its commitment to Carbon 

reductions through the Clean Power Plan. This is the critical issue of my 

generation and we need to act now. 

I am a Maryland native, an active member of the youth climate movement, 

and an advocate for clean energy and conservation. 

I was inspired to act on climate change in my teens because of my love of 

our natural environment. Growing up I spent my summers and winters 

enjoying the outdoors and visiting national parks; something 1 still enjoy 

whenever I get the chance. But my love of the natural world is just one of 

the many reasons why I am so engaged on this global problem. 

I am a part of this movement because climate disruption will have a deep 

impact on our natural environment, our economy, our health, and most 

importantly, our future generations. 

I am a part of this movement because, someday, I hope to be a father. 
The choices that we make today around energy and pollution will have a 

lasting impact. My generation, your children's generation, and generations 

to come will be the ones facing the implications of these decisions and 

bear the true cost of our inaction on this issue. 

I've been listening to the many passionate speakers today, and I know 

you've heard the plan's impacts stated over and over. You are well aware 

that the Clean Power Plan has the potential to improve public health. Up to 

150,000 asthma attacks prevented. More than 6,000 premature deaths 

avoided each year. We cannot overstate the improvements in health and 

quality of life that this plan would bring. Personally, I am not willing to 

accept a weakened version of this plan that could threaten my health and 

the health of future generations. 

Those opposed to carbon emission regulations argue that our economy 

and our energy system isn't ready for this. But I would implore them, and I 

implore you: Ask my generation. Ask the future leaders of this nation. 

We are ready. 

We are ready to take responsibility and tackle this issue. 

We are ready to invent, to innovate. 

We are ready to work tirelessly to move beyond a system and a society 

that revolves around carbon emissions. 

Because we know what is at stake, and we have no other choice. 
The Clean Power Plan is a critical first step for this country to show its 

commitment to action in the face of climate disruption. We have an 

expectation and an obligation to set the gold standard, and this plan is a 

step in that direction. 

On behalf of my own generation, the kids I hope to raise to appreciate the 

world around them, and the grandchildren I hope to see grow up in a place 

where they can breathe clean air and swim in clean water, I thank you for 

your dedication to a strong Clean Power Plan. And I challenge you to 

continue to push the envelope, to lead the way and advance these issues, 

even in the face of opposition. 

The time is now. 

Thank you.
1836.7004 NASA solicitation provision and contract clause.       The contracting officer may insert a clause substantially the same as stated at 1852.236–75, Partnering for Construction Contracts, in solicitations and contracts for construction, when it has been determined that the benefits to be derived from partnering exceed the costs.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 1836.70—Partnering
Order entered March 13, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-01141-CR

JEREMY JOHN SANDERSFELD, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 296th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 416-82341-07

ORDER

The Court ORDERS the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine why appellant’s 

brief has not been filed. In this regard, the trial court shall make appropriate findings and 

recommendations and determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal, whether 

appellant is indigent, or if not indigent, whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeal. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b). If the trial court cannot obtain appellant’s presence at the hearing, the 

trial court shall conduct the hearing in appellant’s absence. See Meza v. State, 742 S.W.2d 708 

(Tex. App.–Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.) (per curiam). If appellant is indigent, the trial court is 

ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective representation, which 

may include appointment of new counsel.
We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record of the proceedings, which shall include 

written findings and recommendations, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this 

order.

This appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with the above order. The 

appeal shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are 

received, whichever is earlier.

/s/ DAVID EVANS 

JUSTICE
CASE ANNOUNCEMENTS

*January 11, 2008*

[Cite as *01/11/2008 Case Announcements,*2008-Ohio-66.]

MOTION AND PROCEDURAL RULINGS

2007-0615.

#### Rhodes v. Hamilton Cty. Bd. of Revision.

Board of Tax Appeals, No. 2005-M-1098. This cause is pending before the court as an appeal from the Board of Tax Appeals. Upon consideration of the Hamilton County Auditor’s motion for leave to permit amici curiae to participate in oral argument,

It is ordered by the court that the motion is granted, and amici curiae shall share the time allotted to appellee.
Order filed, August 27, 2014.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 14

- 00482

- CV

____________ HA THI MANNING A/K/A ROSE MANNING , Appellant

V.

SOHAIL YOUSEF AND AM ARENA SALON & DAY SP A, LLC D/B/A

ARENA SALON & DAY SP A , Appell ee

On Appeal from the 270th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2013

- 48551



### ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due June 30, 2014

. See Tex. R. App.
P. 35.1. On July 11, 2014 , this court ordered the court reporter to f ile the record within 30 days. The record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.We order Annette Peltier , the official court reporter, to file the record in

this appeal w ithin 10 days of the date of this order

. No further extension will be entertained absent exceptional circumstances. The trial and appellate courts are jointly responsible for ensuring that the appellate record is timely filed. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.3(c ). If Annette Peltier does not timely file the record as ordered, we will issue an order directing the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine the
reason for the failure to file the record.

PER CURIAM
1847.7001 Contract clause.       The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.247–71, Protection of the Florida Manatee, in solicitations and contracts when deliveries or vessel operations, dockside work, or disassembly functions under the contract will involve use of waterways inhabited by manatees. The clause shall also be included in applicable subcontracts (including vendor deliveries).    **Parent topic:** Subpart 1847.70—Protection of the Florida Manatee
Case 2:06-cr-00209-MHT-CSC Document 48 Filed 10/03/2007 Page 1 of 6
Case 2:06-cr-00209-MHT-CSC Document 48 Filed 10/03/2007 Page 2 of 6
Case 2:06-cr-00209-MHT-CSC Document 48 Filed 10/03/2007 Page 3 of 6
Case 2:06-cr-00209-MHT-CSC Document 48 Filed 10/03/2007 Page 4 of 6
Case 2:06-cr-00209-MHT-CSC Document 48 Filed 10/03/2007 Page 5 of 6
Case 2:06-cr-00209-MHT-CSC Document 48 Filed 10/03/2007 Page 6 of 6
§ 150.17a Compliance with requirements of US/IAEA Safeguards Agreement. ( a ) For purposes of this section, the terms *facility, location*, and *Eligible Facilities List* have the meanings set forth in § 75.4 of this chapter.
( b ) Each person who, under an Agreement State license, is authorized to possess byproduct, source, or special nuclear material is subject to the provisions of Part 75 of this chapter and shall comply with its applicable provisions. However, regarding these persons, the Commission will issue orders under section 274m of the Act instead of making license amendments; and, to the extent Part 75 of this chapter refers to license amendments and license conditions, these references shall be deemed, for purposes of this paragraph, to refer to orders under section 274m of the Act.
( c ) ( 1 ) In response to a written request by the Commission, each applicant for an Agreement State license or certificate, and each recipient of an Agreement State license or certificate shall submit facility information, as described in § 75.10 of this chapter, on Form N-71 and associated forms, and site information on DOC/NRC Form AP-A and associated forms;
( 2 ) As required by the Additional Protocol, shall submit location information described in § 75.11 of this chapter on DOC/NRC Form AP-1 and associated forms; and
( 3 ) Shall permit verification thereof by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); and shall take other action as may be necessary to implement the US/IAEA Safeguards Agreement, as described in Part 75 of this chapter.
( d ) In response to a written request by the Commission, each applicant for an Agreement State license or certificate, and each recipient of an Agreement State license or certificate shall submit facility information, as described in § 75.10 of this chapter, on Form N-71 and associated forms, and site information on DOC/NRC Form AP-A and associated forms; shall submit location information described in § 75.11 of this chapter on DOC/NRC Form AP-1 or AP-A and associated forms; shall permit verification thereof by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); and shall take other action as may be necessary to implement the US/IAEA Safeguards Agreement, as described in part 75 of this chapter.
[73 FR 78615, Dec. 23, 2008]
162 So.2d 13

#### STATE of Louisiana v. Walter W. EAST.

No. 47184.

March 31, 1964.

In re: Walter W. East applying for writs of certiorari, mandamus and prohibition.

' ' The' application is denied.' ■ There is no merit to the alleged errors eompláined of.
EXHIBIT 99.1

Certification of CEO and CFO Pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of  NTS-Properties VI, a Maryland Limited Partnership
(the  "Partnership") for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2002,
as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the
"Report"),   J.D.   Nichols,   as  Chief  Executive   Officer  of  the
Partnership,   and  Gregory  A.  Wells,  as  Chief  Financial   Officer  of  the
Partnership,  each hereby  certifies,  pursuant  to 18 U.S.C.  §  1350,  as
adopted pursuant to § 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, that, to the
best of his knowledge:

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
Partnership.

/s/     J.D. Nichols

Name:     J.D. Nichols
Title:       Chief Executive Officer of NTS Capital Corporation, General Partner of NTS-Properties Associates VI, General Partner of NTS-Properties VI,
               a Maryland Limited Partnership
Date:       November 14, 2002

/s/     Gregory A. Wells

Name:     Gregory A. Wells
Title:       Chief Financial Officer of NTS Capital Corporation, General Partner of NTS-Properties Associates VI, General Partner of NTS-Properties VI,
               a Maryland Limited Partnership
Date:       November 14, 2002

This  certification  accompanies  the Report  pursuant  to §  906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and shall not,  except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the  Partnership for purposes of
§18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.



See also the certification  pursuant to Sec. 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, which is also attached to this Report.
Editorial Note on Part 2
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 2.1213 Application for a stay. Cross Reference
Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 67834 , Aug. 22, 2024.
( a ) Any application for a stay of the effectiveness of the NRC staff's action on a matter involved in a hearing under this subpart must be filed with the presiding officer within five (5) days of the issuance of the notice of the NRC staff's action under § 2.1202(a) and must be filed and considered in accordance with paragraphs (b), (c) and (d) of this section.
( b ) An application for a stay of the NRC staff's action may not be longer than ten (10) pages, exclusive of affidavits, and must contain: ( 1 ) A concise summary of the action which is requested to be stayed; and
( 2 ) A concise statement of the grounds for a stay, with reference to the factors specified in paragraph (d) of this section.
( c ) Within ten (10) days after service of an application for a stay of the NRC staff's action under this section, any party and/or the NRC staff may file an answer supporting or opposing the granting of a stay. Answers may not be longer than ten (10) pages, exclusive of affidavits, and must concisely address the matters in paragraph (b) of this section as appropriate. Further replies to answers will not be entertained.
( d ) In determining whether to grant or deny an application for a stay of the NRC staff's action, the following will be considered: ( 1 ) Whether the requestor will be irreparably injured unless a stay is granted;
( 2 ) Whether the requestor has made a strong showing that it is likely to prevail on the merits;
( 3 ) Whether the granting of a stay would harm other participants; and
( 4 ) Where the public interest lies.
( e ) Any application for a stay of the effectiveness of the presiding officer's initial decision or action under this subpart shall be filed with the Commission in accordance with § 2.342.
( f ) Stays are not available on matters limited to whether a no significant hazards consideration determination was proper in proceedings on power reactor license amendments.
[69 FR 2267, Jan. 14, 2004, as amended at 77 FR 46598, Aug. 3, 2012]
§ 205.195 Filing and service of all submissions. ( a ) ( 1 ) Statements of Objections, Responses to such Statements, and any motions or other documents filed in connection with a proceeding shall meet the requirements of § 205.9 and shall be filed with the Office of Hearings and Appeals in accordance with § 205.4. Unless otherwise specified, any participant may file a response to a motion within five days of service.
( 2 ) All documents shall be filed in duplicate, unless they contain confidential information, in which case they must be filed in triplicate.
( 3 ) If a person claims that any portion of a document which he is filing contains confidential information, such information should be deleted from two of the three copies which are filed. One copy from which confidential information has been deleted will be placed in the Office of Hearings and Appeals Public Docket Room.
( b ) ( 1 ) Persons other than DOE offices shall on the date a submission is filed serve each person on the official service list. Service shall be made in accordance with § 205.7 and may also be made by deposit in the regular United States mail, properly stamped and addressed, when accompanied by proof of service consisting of a certificate of counsel or an affidavit of the person making the service. If any filing arguably contains confidential information, a person may serve copies with the confidential information deleted upon all persons on the official service list except DOE offices, which shall be served both an original filing and one with deletions.
( 2 ) A DOE office shall on the date it files a submission serve all persons on the official service list, unless the filing arguably contains confidential information. In that case the DOE office shall notify the person to whom the information relates of the opportunity to identify and delete the confidential information. The DOE Office may delay the service of a submission containing arguably confidential information upon all persons other than the possessor of the confidential information and other DOE offices up to 14 days. The possessor of the confidential information shall serve the filing with any deletions upon all persons on the official service list within such time period.
( c ) Any filing made under this section shall include a certification of compliance by the filer with the provisions of this subpart. The person serving a document shall file a certificate of service, which includes the date and manner of service for each person on the official service list.
Exhibit 21

SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANT



|                                         |  |                             
|---------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------------
|Name of Subsidiary                       |  | Jurisdiction of Organization
|Allied VGH Inc.(1)                       |  | Nevada                      
|Allied VNC Inc.(2)                       |  | Nevada                      
|Mineral Ridge Resources Inc.(2)(3)       |  | Nevada                      
|Victory Gold Inc.(2)                     |  | Nevada                      
|Victory Exploration Inc.(4)              |  | Nevada                      
|Hycroft Resources & Development, Inc.(2) |  | Nevada                      
|Hycroft Lewis Mine, Inc.(5)              |  | Nevada                      
|Allied Nevada Gold Holdings LLC(1)       |  | Nevada                      



| | (1) | 100% owned by Allied Nevad Gold Corp.
| | --- | -------------------------------------

| | (2) | 100% owned by Allied VGH Inc.
| | --- | -----------------------------

| | (3) | Currently in the process of being dissolved
| | --- | -------------------------------------------

| | (4) | 100% owned by Victory Gold Inc.
| | --- | -------------------------------

| | (5) | 100% owned by Hycroft Resources & Development, Inc.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------
Subpart 3016.1—Selecting Contract Types

Source: 75 FR 41100, July 15, 2010, unless otherwise noted.

Parent topic: PART 3016—TYPES OF CONTRACTS

3016.170 Contracts with Lead System Integrators.

The contracting officer should negotiate the most appropriate contract type and fee structure based

on risks inherent in the work to be performed, in accordance with (FAR) 48 CFR 16.103(a). Contract

type and fee structure should be commensurate with the work to be performed and the risks

assumed. Worthwhile existing guidance on contract type selection, pricing, and fee structures, such

as exists in Vol. I, Ch. 4 of the Contract Reference Pricing Guides

[http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/cpf/docs/contract_pricing_finance_guide/vol...] can be consulted to

determine the appropriate contract type and fee structure for use in varied contracts with lead

system integrators in the production, fielding and sustainment of complex systems.
1

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

 )

 v. ) CR. NO. 2:06-cr-209-WKW

 )

BRIDGET Y. TAYLOR )

O R D E R

Upon consideration of the motion for writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum, filed

September 6, 2006, and for good cause shown, it is

ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED. The Clerk of this Court is hereby

DIRECTED to issue a WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS AD PROSEQUENDUM addressed to

Tutwiler Prison for Women, Wetumpka, Alabama, commanding it to deliver Bridget Y.

Taylor to any United States Marshal or Deputy United States Marshal, and directing said

Marshal or Deputy to bring said prisoner before this court, to be held at Montgomery,

Alabama, on September 27, 2006, at 10:00 am, and to return the prisoner to said official

when the court shall have finished with her.

Done this 7 day of September, 2006. th

 /s/Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cr-00209-MHT-CSC Document 9 Filed 09/07/2006 Page 1 of 1
#### James McCoy, by Raymond McCoy, Sr., His Parent, et al., Appellants, v. Orlando Walker et al., Respondents.

Judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered June 15, 1967, affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Appeal from order of the same court entered June 15, 1967 dismissed, without costs. An order denying a post-trial motion to set aside a verdict and for judgment contrary to the verdict or, in the alternative, for a new trial, made only on the trial minutes, is not appealable. In any event, the contentions on the appeal from the order were considered on the appeal from the judgment. Beldock, P. J., Christ, Rabin, Benjamin and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-41584

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

RICARDO ANASTACIO PEREZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:15-CR-452-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Ricardo Anastacio 

Perez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with 

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 

229 (5th Cir. 2011). Perez has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s 

brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with 

counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 18, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-41584 Document: 00513722145 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/18/2016
No. 15-41584

2

appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is 

GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the 

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 15-41584 Document: 00513722145 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/18/2016