alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION. UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE

.

IN THE 

## A RIZONA 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEALS

D IVISION O NE

STATE OF ARIZONA , Respondent ,

v. JENGHIZ K. STEWART , Petitioner

. N o . 1 CA

- CR 18

- 0219 PRPC

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CR1996

- 005461 The Honorable Justin Beresky , Judge
REVIEW GRANTED; RELI EF DENIED

COUNSEL Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix By Diane Meloche Counsel for Respondent Jenghiz K. Stewart, Kingman Petitioner

MEMORANDUM DECISION Presiding Judge Kenton D. Jones, Judge Michael J. Brown, and Judge Jon W. Thompson delivered the decision of the Court. FILED 7-24-18STATE v. STEWART Decision of the Court

2 P E R C U R I A M : ¶1 Petitioner Jenghiz Stewart seeks review of the superior court’s order denying his petition for post

- conviction relief , file d pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. This is the petitioner’s third successive petition for relief following the revocation of his probation

. ¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or error of law, this Court will not disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for post

- conviction relief. State v. Gutierrez , 229 Ariz. 573, 576

- 77, ¶ 19 (2012). It is the petitioner’s burden to show that the superior court abused its discretion in denying the petition. See State v. Poblete , 227 Ariz. 537, 538, ¶ 1 (App. 2011). ¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior court’s order denying the petition for post

- conviction relief, and the petition for review. We find that petitioner has not shown any abuse of discretion. ¶4 Accordingly, we gr ant review and deny relief.
HomeBureau of Overseas Buildings Operations...Overseas Buildings Operations  Releases

# Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations Releases

55 items

        -    Media Note  		Democracy Collection Launches Traveling Exhibition: “A More Perfect Union: American Artists and the Currents of our Time”	  May 18, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		Department of State Begins Construction on New U.S. Embassy in Lilongwe, Malawi	  May 11, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		Annual Greening Diplomacy Initiative Award and GDI-OBO Resilience Innovation Fund Winners Announced	  April 26, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		Department of State Begins Construction on New U.S. Embassy in Hanoi, Vietnam	  April 15, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		The Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations Announces New Industry Advisory Group Appointments	  April 10, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		Department of State Dedicates New U.S. Embassy in Guatemala City, Guatemala	  March 16, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		Authentication of Washington at Princeton Portrait by Charles Willson Peale at U.S. Embassy Paris Ambassador’s Residence	  February 23, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		Overseas Buildings Operations Dedicates New U.S. Embassy in Ankara, Türkiye	  February 21, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		Office of Art in Embassies Celebrates 60 Years with Art Diplomacy for Democracy	  January 31, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		Overseas Buildings Operations’ New U.S. Consulate General Projects Receive 2022 American Architecture Awards®	  December 6, 2022 

previous page1234…6next page

Back to Top
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Authentication of Washington at Princeton Portrait by Charles Willson Peale at U.S. Embassy Paris Ambassador’s Residence

# 									Authentication of Washington at Princeton Portrait by Charles Willson Peale at U.S. Embassy Paris Ambassador’s Residence							

Media Note

Office of the Spokesperson

February 23, 2023

The Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations’ Office of Cultural Heritage has confirmed the authenticity of a painting of George Washington after the Battle of Princeton that was gifted to the embassy in 1989 by Caroline Ryan Foulke and hangs in the U.S. Embassy Paris Ambassador’s Residence. The painting, attributed to Charles Willson Peale, was part of a series of portraits by Peale in the late 1770s and early 1780s, several of which were used as diplomatic gifts from the United States to allied nations during the Revolutionary War. Washington’s portrait in Paris was painted by Peale in 1779 as a diplomatic gift commissioned by Henry Laurens of South Carolina for the government of the Netherlands but was seized by the British Navy in 1780. The study established a line of ownership and analyzed the physical attributes of the painting to confirm its authenticity.

The Office of Cultural Heritage has released a 17-minute documentary video shot during the study that discusses the research and analytical techniques used to determine its authenticity. Learn more about the study on the Office of Cultural Heritage website.

For further information, please contact Katherine Ferguson at fergusonk@state.gov. For media requests, please contact Neda Brown at OBO-External-Affairs@state.gov.

Tags

Office of the SpokespersonBureau of Overseas Buildings Operations

Back to Top
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 31.1

I, Gerald J. Yakatan, Ph.D., certify that:

1.    I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of AVANIR
Pharmaceuticals;

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)) 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(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 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.

                                        /s/ Gerald J. Yakatan, Ph.D.
                                        -----------------------------------
                                        Gerald J. Yakatan, Ph.D.
                                        Chief Executive Officer

                                        May 14, 2004
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter II

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at 78 FR 60697, Oct. 2, 2013.

#### § 332.7 Delivery of bonds.

Authorized issuing agents delivered Series H bonds, either over-the-counter in person or by mail, at the risk and expense of the United States, to the address given by the purchaser, but only within the United States, its territories and possessions, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. No mail deliveries elsewhere were made. If purchased by citizens of the United States temporarily residing abroad, the bonds were delivered at such address in the United States as the purchaser directed.
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 123 (Tuesday, June 26, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 38126]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15577]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 7933]

In the Matter of the Designation of Abubakar Adam Kambar, Also 
Known as Abu Yasir, Also Known as Abubakar Kambar, Also Known as Abu 
Yasir Kambar, as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist Pursuant to 
Section 1(b) of Executive Order 13224, as Amended

    Acting under the authority of and in accordance with section 1(b) 
of Executive Order 13224 of September 23, 2001, as amended by Executive 
Order 13268 of July 2, 2002, and Executive Order 13284 of January 23, 
2003, I hereby determine that the individual known as Abubakar Adam 
Kambar, also known as Abu Yasir, also known as Abubakar Kambar, also 
known as Abu Yasir Kambar, committed, or poses a significant risk of 
committing, acts of terrorism that threaten the security of U.S. 
nationals or the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the 
United States.
    Consistent with the determination in Section 10 of Executive Order 
13224 that ``prior notice to persons determined to be subject to the 
Order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States 
would render ineffectual the blocking and other measures authorized in 
the Order because of the ability to transfer funds instantaneously,'' I 
determine that no prior notice needs to be provided to any person 
subject to this determination who might have a constitutional presence 
in the United States, because to do so would render ineffectual the 
measures authorized in the Order.
    This notice shall be published in the Federal Register.

    Dated: June 18, 2012.
Hillary Rodham Clinton,
Secretary of State.
[FR Doc. 2012-15577 Filed 6-25-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-10-P
```
#### Robert Austin BARTLETT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. W. Keith GOODY; D. David Lambert, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 00-8040.

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

Feb. 27, 2001.

Before SEYMOUR, BALDOCK, and LUCERO, Circuit Judges.

*743ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

BALDOCK, Circuit Judge.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. *See*Fed.RApp.P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir.R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

In this diversity action, Robert Austin Bartlett appeals from the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of his former attorneys on his claims of breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, conspiracy, and fraud in connection with their representation in his divorce proceedings. The district court determined that Bartlett’s claims were barred by the applicable Wyoming statute of limitations. In this appeal, we exercise jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and review the district court’s grant of summary judgment de novo, applying the same standards as that court pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c). *See Simms v. Okla. ex rel. Dep’t of Mental Health & Substance Abuse Servs.,*165 F.3d 1321, 1326 (10th Cir.), *cert. denied,*528 U.S. 815, 120 S.Ct. 53, 145 L.Ed.2d 46 (1999).

Bartlett argues that the district court erred in (1) selecting the applicable statute of limitations; (2) determining the date on which the statute began to run; (3) refusing to toll the statute for legal disability, attributable to a lack of access to documents, a heart attack, and a back injury; (4) failing to recognize a federal question, in that the requested damage amount included IRS penalties and fines imposed as a result of his divorce decree; (5) granting the motion for summary judgment without allowing time for a response to a defendant’s supplemental authority memorandum; and (6) displaying bias and prejudice in favor of defendants.

Concerning Bartlett’s substantive claims, we have reviewed the entire record on appeal and conclude that the district court correctly decided this case under the applicable law. Moreover, our record review reveals no bias or prejudice on the part of the district court. Therefore, for substantially the reasons stated in the district court’s order dated April 11, 2000, the judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Wyoming is AFFIRMED. The mandate shall issue forthwith.

*

 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir.R. 36.3.
Exhibit 99.7

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ENACTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report of American Lithium Corp. (the
“Company”) on Form 40-F for the year ended February 28, 2023 (the “Report”) as filed with the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission,

I, Simon Clarke, Chief Executive
Officer ofthe Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as enacted pursuant to Section 906 of the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

| | (i) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (ii) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Company.
| | ---- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|Date: May  30, 2023                  
|-------------------------------------
|                                     
|/s/ Simon Clarke                     
|Simon Clarke, Chief Executive Officer
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter II

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at 78 FR 60697, Oct. 2, 2013.

#### § 306.102 Nontransferable securities.

The provisions of this subpart shall apply to Treasury Bonds, Investment Series B-1975-80, except that prior to maturity any reference to assignments shall be deemed to refer to assignments of the bonds for exchange for the current series of 11⁄2 percent 5-year EA or EO Treasury notes.
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Assistant Secretary Leaf’s Travel to Tunisia, Israel, the West Bank, and Jordan

# 									Assistant Secretary Leaf’s Travel to Tunisia, Israel, the West Bank, and Jordan							

Media Note

Office of the Spokesperson

August 31, 2022

Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs Barbara A. Leaf is traveling to Tunisia, Israel, the West Bank, and Jordan from August 29 to September 4.

Assistant Secretary Leaf is on travel to Tunisia from August 29-31 to meet senior government officials and leading Tunisian experts, including economic analysts, to hear their views on a path forward to improve prosperity for all Tunisians.  Her visit underscores U.S. support for an inclusive and transparent political and economic reform process that represents diverse Tunisian voices and protects fundamental human rights, including freedom of expression. In Tunisia, the Assistant Secretary will also reiterate U.S. support for a political resolution to the Libyan conflict in engagements with senior Libyan and Tunisian officials.  The recent outbreak of violence in Tripoli demonstrates the urgency for warring factions to reach consensus on a constitutional basis for elections to prevent further instability.

The Assistant Secretary will travel to Israel and the West Bank September 1-3 to meet with Israeli and Palestinian officials to discuss a range of priorities, including the United States’ ironclad commitment to Israel’s security, strengthening U.S. cooperation with Israel and the Palestinian Authority, U.S. interest in improving the quality of life for the Palestinian people, and the Administration’s continued support for a two-state solution.

Assistant Secretary Leaf will then travel to Jordan September 3-4. In Amman, she will meet with Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi and discuss the strategic U.S.-Jordan relationship, shared efforts to promote regional stability, and the new seven-year, $10.15 billion bilateral Memorandum of Understanding on Strategic Partnership, announced by President Biden following his July meeting with His Majesty King Abdullah II.

Tags

Bureau of Near Eastern AffairsEconomic AffairsHuman RightsIsraelJordanOffice of the SpokespersonOfficial International TravelRegional IssuesSecurityTunisiaWest Bank

Back to Top
Amendment #2 to Office and Warehouse Lease



 Exhibit 10.1 
 AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO 
 OFFICE AND WAREHOUSE LEASE AGREEMENT

 THIS AMENDMENT NO. 2 is entered into as of July 1, 2012 (the “Amendment”) between Amnet Holdings, LLC
(the “Landlord”) and World of Jeans & Tops, dba Tilly’s, (the “Tenant”) to the Office and Warehouse Lease agreement dated as of November 1, 2010, as amended (the “Lease”). 

RECITAL 

Whereas Landlord and Tenant desire to amend the terms of the Lease to provide Tenant with less square feet in the Building (as defined in
the Lease). 
 AGREEMENT 
 Therefore, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledge by both the parties, Tenant and Landlord agree to amend the Lease as follows: 

 

	1.	Section 1.6 Premises Address is amended by adding the following additional sentence at the end of the paragraph: 


Beginning July 1, 2012, Landlord will decrease the amount of warehouse space available in the Premises to approximately 12,470
square feet. 
  

	2.	Section 1.9 Minimum Monthly Rental and Minimum Rental Amount is amended by adding the following additional sentence to the end of the paragraph:


 Beginning July 1, 2012, Tenant will pay Landlord the Minimum Monthly Rental based on the new square
footage amount in Section 1.6. 
  

	3.	This Amendment together with the Lease, and amendments thereto, contain all of the agreements and conditions made between the parties and may not be modified orally or
in any other manner other than by agreement in writing signed by all parties or their respective successors in interest. This Amendment will be governed by California law. 


Remainder of Page Blank – Signatures Follow 







 IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned have executed this Amendment No. 2 as of the date
written above. 
  

					
	Landlord	 		 	Tenant
			
	/s/ Hezy Shaked	 		 	/s/ Bill Langsdorf
	Name: Hezy Shaked	 		 	Name: Bill Langsdorf
	Title: Manager	 		 	Title: Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsEnforcement Documents

# Significant Enforcement Actions

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issues significant (escalated) enforcement actions to licensees, individuals, and non-licensees for failure to comply with agency regulations. For details regarding escalated enforcement actions issued by the NRC, see the following categories:
            - Reactor Licensees
            - Individuals
            - Materials Licensees
            - Non-Licensees
            - Fuel Cycle Facilities

For additional information about current actions, see Issued Significant Enforcement Actions.

Although this site does not include a collection of enforcement actions issued for less significant violations (referred to as non-escalated actions), these actions are a part of the public record for each licensee and can be located by searching individual dockets through NRC's online Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS).

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Monday, October 23, 2023

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - Significant Enforcement Actions
          - Notices of Enforcement Discretion
          - Office of Enforcement Annual Reports
          - History of Enforcement Policy
          - Security Orders
          - Confirmatory Orders (ADR)

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

                - The Commission
                - Job Openings
                - ADVANCE Act
                - Palisades Restart
                - Environmental Justice 
                - Pilgrim Water Releases
                - Monticello Tritium Issue
                - International Strategy 2021-2025
                - Tribal Liaison Program
                - MAP-X
                - Transformation at the NRC - Updated
                - OIG Hotline
                - Rulemaking Activity
                - Commission Documents
                - Advanced Reactors

#### Related Information

            - About Enforcement
            - Nuclear Security and Safeguards
            - Enforcement Program

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Monday, October 23, 2023
IA

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 19

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States pertaining

to prayer.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 4, 1995

Mr. DE LA GARZA introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred

to the Committee on the Judiciary

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United

States pertaining to prayer.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled

3 (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the fol4 lowing article is hereby proposed as an amendment to the

5 Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to

6 all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution if rati7 fied by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several

8 States within seven years from the date of its submission

9 to the States by the Congress:
2

HJ 19 IH

1 ‘‘ARTICLE—

2 ‘‘Nothing in this Constitution shall be construed to

3 prohibit individual or group prayer in public schools or

4 other public institutions. No person shall be required by

5 the United States or by any State to participate in

6 prayer.’’.

Æ