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

[109th Congress Public Law 421]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[DOCID: f:publ421.109]

[[Page 120 STAT. 2889]]

Public Law 109-421
109th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To provide for certain lands to be held in trust for the Utu Utu Gwaitu 
          Paiute Tribe. <<NOTE: Dec. 20, 2006 -  [H.R. 854]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. LANDS TO BE HELD IN TRUST.

    (a) In General.--Subject to valid existing rights, all right, title, 
and interest of the United States in and to the lands, including 
improvements and appurtenances, described in subsection (b) are hereby 
declared to be held in trust by the United States for the benefit of the 
Utu Utu Gwaitu Paiute Tribe, Benton Paiute Reservation.
    (b) Land Description.--The lands to be held in trust pursuant to 
subsection (a) are the approximately 240 acres described as follows: 
Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, Township 2 South, Range 31 East Section 
11: SE\1/4\ and E\1/2\ of SW\1/4\.
    (c) Gaming Restriction.--Lands taken into trust pursuant to 
subsection (a) shall not be considered to have been taken into trust 
for, and shall not be eligible for, class II gaming or class III gaming 
(as those terms are used in the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 
2701 et seq.)).

    Approved December 20, 2006.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 854:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 109-557 (Comm. on Resources).
SENATE REPORTS: No. 109-342 (Comm. on Indian Affairs).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 152 (2006):
            July 24, considered and passed House.
            Dec. 6, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
CASE ANNOUNCEMENTS

*January 14, 2008*

[Cite as *01/14/2008 Case Announcements,*2008-Ohio-71.]

MOTION AND PROCEDURAL RULINGS

2007-0507.

#### Albrecht v. Treon.

Certified Question of State Law, United States District Court, Southern District of Ohio, Western Division, No. 1.-06CV274. This cause is pending before the court on the certification of a state law question from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Western Division. Upon consideration of respondent’s motion for leave to file a response to amici curiae reply briefs,

It is ordered by the court that the motion is denied.

Pfeifer, J., dissents.
| | 1. | I have reviewed this Form 10-Q for the nine-months ended September 30, 2016 of Universal Detection Technology;
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




| | 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(s) 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
























| | 5. | The registrant's other certifying officer(s) 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 registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



















/s/ Jacques Tizabi


By: Jacques Tizabi


Title: President, CEO, Secretary and
CASE ANNOUNCEMENTS

*December 26, 2007*

[Cite as *12/26/2007 Case Announcements,*2007-Ohio-6803.]

MERIT DECISIONS WITHOUT OPINIONS

2007-1738.

#### State ex rel. Hubbard v. Travis.

In Mandamus. On complaint in mandamus of Dimitri Hubbard. On S.Ct.Prac.R. X(5) determination, cause dismissed.

Moyer, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, and Cupp, JJ., concur.
PGI 209.407-3 Procedures.

Use similar procedures as in DFARS PGI 209.406-3 for suspensions.

Parent topic: PGI 209.407 Suspension.
Editorial Note on Part 1045
Editorial Notes: Nomenclature changes to part 1045 appear at 88 FR 41294, June 26, 2023, and 88 FR 82238, Nov. 24, 2023.

§ 1045.110 How are challenges to the classification and declassification of RD, FRD, or TFNI submitted and processed? ( a ) Any person with access to RD, FRD, or TFNI who believes that RD, FRD, or TFNI is improperly classified is encouraged and expected to challenge the classification. The challenge may be to information RD, FRD, or TFNI (*e.g.,* a guide topic) or the classification status of matter containing RD, FRD, or TFNI.
( b ) Challenges are submitted in accordance with agency procedures.
( c ) Each agency must establish procedures for a person to challenge the classification status of RD, FRD, or TFNI if they believe that the classification status is improper. These procedures must: ( 1 ) Advise the person of their right to submit a challenge directly to the Director, Office of Classification, EHSS-60/Germantown Building, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585, at any time.
( 2 ) Ensure that under no circumstances is an employee subject to retribution for challenging the classification status of RD, FRD, or TFNI;
( 3 ) Require the agency that initially receives the challenge to provide an initial response within 60 days to the person submitting the challenge.
( 4 ) Require the agency to advise the person of their appeal rights. If the employee is not satisfied with the agency response or the agency has not responded to the challenge within 180 days, the challenge involving RD, FRD, or TFNI may be appealed to the Director, Office of Classification. ( i ) In the case of FRD and RD related primarily to the military utilization of nuclear weapons, the Director, Office of Classification, coordinates with the appropriate DoD official (as specified in DoD Instruction 5210.02 or subsequent instructions).
( ii ) In the case of TFNI, the Director, Office of Classification, coordinates with DNI.
( 5 ) If the response to the initial appeal and its justification for classification does not satisfy the person making the challenge, a further appeal may be made to the Director, Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security, EHSS-1/Forrestal Building, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585.
( d ) Agency responses to RD or TFNI challenges are limited to interpreting the application of guidance to derivatively classify matter. Except for DoD, agency responses to FRD are limited to interpreting the application of guidance to derivatively classify matter. An agency may coordinate challenges regarding interpreting guidance for RD or TFNI with DOE, and may coordinate challenges regarding interpreting guidance for FRD with DOE or DoD.
( e ) Agencies must forward challenges that require decisions other than interpreting the application of guidance (*e.g.,* challenges to guide topics) to the Director, Office of Classification.
[83 FR 66007, Dec. 21, 2018, as amended at 88 FR 41295, June 26, 2023]
SUBPART 42.1 – CONTRACT AUDIT

SERVICES

(Revised September 20, 2016 through PROCLTR 2016-10)

Parent topic: PART 42 – CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION

42.101 Contract audit responsibilities.

The Contract and Pricing Compliance Division Chief is the designee to oversee contract audit followup in accordance with DoDI 7640.02, Policy for Follow-Up on Contract Audit Reports (

https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/764002p.pdf ).
#### David L. JOHNSON *v.*STATE of Arkansas

CR 07-344

262 S.W.3d 139

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Opinion delivered September 13, 2007

*Hugh R. Laws,*for appellant.

No response.

Per Curiam.

Appellant David L. Johnson, by and through his attorney, has filed a motion for belated appeal. His attorney, Hugh R. Laws, states that on January 5, 2007, Johnson filed a defective notice of appeal in that it reserved the right to appeal from an order denying the motion to suppress, rather than the judgment and conviction order. On August 1, 2007, Johnson’s appeal was dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of a proper notice of appeal. Mr. Laws now candidly admits that he erred by filing a defective notice of appeal from the judgment and conviction entered against Johnson on, December 21, 2006, and that his error prevented Johnson from having his convictions reviewed.

This court clarified its treatment of motions for rule on clerk and motions for belated appeals in *McDonald v. State,*356 Ark. 106, 146 S.W.3d 883 (2004). There we said that there are only two possible reasons for an appeal not being timely perfected: either the party or attorney filing the appeal is at fault, or, there is “good reason.” 356 Ark. at 116, 146 S.W.3d at 891. We explained:

> Where an appeal is not timely perfected, either the party or attorney filing the appeal is at fault, or there is good reason that the appeal was not timely perfected. The party or attorney filing the appeal is therefore faced with two options. First, where the party or attorney filing the appeal is at fault, fault should be admitted by affidavit filed *525with the motion or in the motion itself. There is no advantage in declining to admit fault where fault exists. Second, where the party or attorney believes that there is good reason the appeal was not perfected, the case for good reason can be made in the motion, and this court will decide whether good reason is present.

*Id.,*146 S.W.3d at 891 (footnote omitted). While this court no longer requires an affidavit admitting fault before we will consider the motion, an attorney should candidly admit fault where he has erred and is responsible for the failure to perfect the appeal. *See id.*

In accordance with *McDonald v. State, supra,*Mr. Laws has candidly admitted fault. The motion is, therefore, granted. A copy of this opinion will be forwarded to the Committee on Professional Conduct.

Motion granted.
§ 15.11 Form of payment. These procedures are directed primarily to the recovery of money on behalf of the Government. The NRC may demand: ( a ) The return of specific property; or
( b ) The performance of specific services.
[47 FR 7616, Feb. 22, 1982, as amended at 67 FR 30319, May 6, 2002]
SUBPART 18.2 – EMERGENCY ACQUISITION

FLEXIBILITIES

Parent topic: PART 18 – EMERGENCY ACQUISITIONS

18.270 Head of contracting activity determinations.

The DLA Acquisition Director has delegated authority to the contracting officer to make the

determinations at—

(a) 18.201(b) and (c);

(b) 18.202(a)-(d); and

(c) 18.204(b).
#### Mortimer M. Dodes, Respondent, v. Martin H. Smith et al., Appellants.

Judgment unanimously affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements to *930the respondent, on the ground that there was neither an appropriate request to charge nor an exception taken to the charge as given. Concur — Capozzoli, J. P., Markewich, Nunez and Steuer, JJ.
Exhibit 34.4a



LOGO

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

Tothe Board of Directors and shareholders of CoreLogic, Inc.:

We have examined managements assertion, included in the accompanying Report on Assessment of Compliance, that CoreLogic Tax Services, LLC (the
Company), a subsidiary of CoreLogic, Inc. complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commissions Regulation AB for all loans for residential and commercial mortgage loan
outsourcing customers for which the Company served as the residential and commercial tax service provider (the Platform), as of December 31, 2016 and for the year then ended, only including 1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(2)(ii),
1122(d)(2)(v), 1122(d)(2)(vi), 1122(d)(2)(vii), 1122(d)(4)(xi), 1122(d)(4)(xii) and 1122(d)(4)(xiii), which the Company has determined are applicable to the servicing activities performed by it with respect to the Platform. Management is responsible
for the Companys compliance with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on managements assertion based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly,
included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Companys compliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of
selected servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether the Company performed those selected activities in compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Our procedures were limited to the selected servicing activities
performed by the Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were not designed to detect noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts
calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Companys compliance with
the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, managements assertion that the Company complied with the aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of
and for the year ended December 31, 2016 for all loans for residential and commercial mortgage loan outsourcing customers for which the Company served as the residential and commercial tax service provider is fairly stated, in all material
respects.



LOGO

February 6, 2017



LOGO
###### Editorial Note on Part 1045

#### Editorial Notes:Nomenclature changes to part 1045 appear at 88 FR 41294, June 26, 2023, and 88 FR 82238, Nov. 24, 2023.

§ 1045.50 [Reserved]

Editorial Notes:

Nomenclature changes to part 1045 appear at 88 FR 41294, June 26, 2023, and 88 FR 82238, Nov. 24, 2023.
#### § 993.74 Records.

Each handler shall maintain such records of prunes received, held and disposed of by him, as are prescribed by the committee and needed by it to perform its functions under this subpart. Such records shall be retained for at least two years beyond the crop year of their applicability.
38.9002 DLA–Managed Federal Supply

Schedules for FedMall.

(a) DCSO contracting officers shall—

(1) Use delegated authority from GSA to establish Federal Supply Schedules in compliance with FAR

Part 38 and the Agreement between the DoD and GSA Governing Supply Management Relationships

Under the National Supply System, dated February 19, 1971.

(2) Consider GSA Acquisition Manual (GSAM) guidelines and GSA contracting practices when

establishing Federal Supply Schedules. Contracting officers may use specific GSA clauses,

procedures, and practices if determined to be in the best interest of the Government.

(3) Determine the prices of fixed-price supplies to be fair and reasonable for the purpose of

establishing the Federal Supply Schedule.

(4) Determine in writing contract termination is appropriate prior to removing a contract from

FedMall.

Parent topic: SUBPART 38.90 DLA–MANAGED FEDERAL SUPPLY SCHEDULES
Editorial Note on Part 2
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 2.326 Motions to reopen. ( a ) A motion to reopen a closed record to consider additional evidence will not be granted unless the following criteria are satisfied: ( 1 ) The motion must be timely. However, an exceptionally grave issue may be considered in the discretion of the presiding officer even if untimely presented;
( 2 ) The motion must address a significant safety or environmental issue; and
( 3 ) The motion must demonstrate that a materially different result would be or would have been likely had the newly proffered evidence been considered initially.
( b ) The motion must be accompanied by affidavits that set forth the factual and/or technical bases for the movant's claim that the criteria of paragraph (a) of this section have been satisfied. Affidavits must be given by competent individuals with knowledge of the facts alleged, or by experts in the disciplines appropriate to the issues raised. Evidence contained in affidavits must meet the admissibility standards of this subpart. Each of the criteria must be separately addressed, with a specific explanation of why it has been met. When multiple allegations are involved, the movant must identify with particularity each issue it seeks to litigate and specify the factual and/or technical bases which it believes support the claim that this issue meets the criteria in paragraph (a) of this section.
( c ) A motion predicated in whole or in part on the allegations of a confidential informant must identify to the presiding officer the source of the allegations and must request the issuance of an appropriate protective order.
( d ) A motion to reopen that relates to a contention not previously in controversy among the parties must also satisfy the § 2.309(c) requirements for new or amended contentions filed after the deadline in § 2.309(b).
[69 FR 2236, Jan. 14, 2004, as amended at 77 FR 46593, Aug. 3, 2012]
§ 205.300 Who shall apply. ( a ) An electric utility or other entity subject to DOE jurisdiction under part II of the Federal Power Act who proposes to transmit any electricity from the United States to a foreign country must submit an application or be a party to an application submitted by another entity. The application shall be submitted to the Office of Utility Systems of the Economic Regulatory Administration (EPA).
( b ) In connection with an application under §§ 205.300 through 205.309, attention is directed to the provisions of §§ 205.320 through 205.327, below, concerning applications for Presidential Permits for the construction, connection, operation, or maintenance, at the borders of the United States, of facilities for the transmission of electric energy between the United States and a foreign country in compliance with Executive Order 10485, as amended by Executive Order 12038.
Editorial Note on Part 32
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 32 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 32.20 Same: Records and material transfer reports. ( a ) Each person licensed under § 32.18 shall maintain records of transfer of material identifying, by name and address, each person to whom byproduct material is transferred for use under § 30.18 of this chapter or the equivalent regulations of an Agreement State and stating the kinds, quantities, and physical form of byproduct material transferred.
( b ) The licensee shall file a summary report with the Director of the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards by an appropriate method listed in § 30.6(a) of this chapter, including in the address: ATTN: Document Control Desk/Exempt Distribution. ( 1 ) The report must clearly identify the specific licensee submitting the report and include the license number of the specific licensee.
( 2 ) The report must indicate that the materials are transferred for use under § 30.18 or equivalent regulations of an Agreement State.
( c ) For each radionuclide in each physical form, the report shall indicate the total quantity of each radionuclide and the physical form, transferred under the specific license.
( d ) ( 1 ) The licensee shall file the report, covering the preceding calendar year, on or before January 31 of each year. In its first report after December 17, 2007, the licensee shall separately include the total quantity of each radionuclide transferred for transfers in prior years not previously reported to the Commission.
( 2 ) Licensees who permanently discontinue activities authorized by the license issued under § 32.18 shall file a report for the current calendar year within 30 days after ceasing distribution.
( e ) If no transfers of byproduct material have been made under § 32.18 during the reporting period, the report must so indicate.
( f ) The licensee shall maintain the record of a transfer for one year after the transfer is included in a summary report to the Commission.
[72 FR 58488, Oct. 16, 2007, as amended at 73 FR 5719, Jan. 31, 2008; 73 FR 42673, July 23, 2008]
Filed by sedaredgar.com - Lamarun Resources, Inc. - Exhibit 10.3






LAURENCE SOOKOCHOFF, P.Eng 

CONSENT OF EXPERT 
-------------------------


          This
Consent of Expert (the "Consent") is granted this 17th day of July, 2008 by
Sookochoff Consultants Inc., (the "Expert") to Lamarun Resources Inc., (the
"Company"), to be effective as of the date of signing. 

          Pursuant
to Item 601(b)(23) of Regulation S-B, the Expert hereby authorizes the Company
to use, summarize and reference any professional works, publications, reviews
and/or estimates produced by the Expert and/or Expert's biographical information
for the purposes of filing a prospectus with the Securities and Exchange
Commission, to be made publicly available. Additionally, Expert consents to the
use of the Company’s summary of the Expert’s “Lamarun Resources Inc. Geological
Evaluation Report on the Gold Coin Property” dated June 7, 2008 and contained
throughout the Company’s Form SB-2A filed herewith. Furthermore, Expert consents
to being listed as an "Expert" herein. The Expert acknowledges that any
professional judgment on his behalf may produce an impact on the Company's
operating and financing strategies.

* * * * * 

          IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, Sookochoff Consultants Inc. hereby consent to the aforesaid
conditions and circumstances and agree to be named an expert pursuant to Section
7(a) of the Securities Act.

SOOKOCHOFF CONSULTANTS INC. 

   

  By:  
---------------------------
       
Laurence Sookochoff, 
        President
Subpart 1237.1—Service Contracts—General

Parent topic: PART 1237—SERVICE CONTRACTING

1237.110-70 Contract clauses.

(a) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1252.237–70, Qualifications of Contractor

Employees, in all solicitations and contracts for services where contractor employees will have

access to Government facilities and sensitive information, including proprietary data and/or

resources.

(b) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1252.237–73, Key Personnel, in solicitations and

contracts for services when the selection for award is substantially based on the offeror's possession

of special capabilities regarding personnel.