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

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3385

To affirm the role of the States in setting reasonable occupancy standards,

and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 1, 1996

Mr. MCCOLLUM (for himself, Mr. LAZIO of New York, Mrs. ROUKEMA, Mr.

BEREUTER, Mr. BAKER of Louisiana, Mr. BENTSEN, Mr. HAYWORTH,

Mr. STOCKMAN, Mr. BLILEY, Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN, Mr. GOODLATTE,

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas, Mr. LIVINGSTON, Mr. MORAN, Mrs. MYRICK,

Mr. PICKETT, Ms. PRYCE, and Mr. SHADEGG) introduced the following

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Banking and Financial

Services, subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

A BILL

To affirm the role of the States in setting reasonable

occupancy standards, and for other purposes.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘State Occupancy

5 Standards Affirmation Act of 1996’’.
2

•HR 3385 IH

1 SEC. 2. OCCUPANCY STANDARDS.

2 (a) NATIONAL STANDARD PROHIBITED.—Notwith3 standing any other provision of law, the Secretary of

4 Housing and Urban Development shall not directly or in5 directly establish a national occupancy standard.

6 (b) STATE STANDARD.—If a State establishes an oc7 cupancy standard—

8 (1) such standard shall be considered reason9 able; and

10 (2) the Secretary shall take no action with re11 spect to such standard.

12 (c) ABSENCE OF STATE STANDARD.—If a State fails

13 to establish an occupancy standard, the Secretary shall

14 take no action with respect to an occupancy standard of

15 2 persons per bedroom established by a housing provider.

16 SEC. 3. OCCUPANCY STANDARD DEFINED.

17 (a) GENERAL RULE.—Except as provided in sub18 section (b), the term ‘‘occupancy standard’’ means a law,

19 regulation, or housing provider policy that establishes a

20 limit on the number of residents a housing provider can

21 properly manage in a dwelling for any 1 or more of the

22 following purposes—

23 (1) providing a decent home and services for

24 each resident;
3

•HR 3385 IH

1 (2) enhancing the livability of a dwelling for all

2 residents, including the dwelling for each particular

3 resident; and

4 (3) avoiding undue physical deterioration of the

5 dwelling and property.

6 (b) EXCEPTION.—The term ‘‘occupancy standard’’

7 does not include a Federal, State, or local restriction re8 garding the maximum number of persons permitted to oc9 cupy a dwelling for the sole purpose of protecting the

10 health and safety of the residents of a dwelling, including

11 building and housing code provisions.

12 SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.

13 This Act shall take effect January 1, 1996.

Æ
#### Julius Levy et al., Appellants, *v.*Fannie Cohen, Respondent.

Appeal by the plaintiffs from a judgment of the Municipal Court, fourth district, borough of Manhattan, rendered in favor of the defendant.

Leon Sanders, for appellants..

A. E. Hagemann, for respondent.

Freedman, P. J.

According to the facts as we must assume the justice found them, the plaintiffs were promised compensation' in case they; as brokers, brought to the' defendant a purchaser will ing and able to purchase defendant’s premises upon terms to bJ thereafter agreed upon between such purchaser and the defendant The plaintiffs did introduce a prospective purchaser, but' such prrchaser and the defendant could not agree upon the terms aid their minds never met.' The plaintiffs, therefore, never earnid their commission. There was sufficient evidence upon which ¡he justice could find as here stated, and upon this ground the jiflg-. ment should be affirmed. That being so, the result is the sane, whether the written promise of the plaintiffs to wait for the jayment of their commission until the title should be passed be treated-as part of thé original contract as claimed by the deihd- ■ ant, or as a promise by the plaintiffs without consideration because made subsequent to their contract with the defendant. /

Judgment should be affirmed.

MacLean and Leventritt, JJ., concur.

*Judgment*affirmed, with costs to respondent.
§ 59.8 How is a grant awarded? ( a ) The notice of grant award specifies how long HHS intends to support the project without requiring the project to recompete for funds. This anticipated period will usually be for three to five years.
( b ) Generally, the grant will initially be for one year and subsequent continuation awards will also be for one year at a time. A recipient must submit a separate application to have the support continued for each subsequent year. Decisions regarding continuation awards and the funding level of such awards will be made after consideration of such factors as the recipient's progress and management practices and the availability of funds. In all cases, continuation awards require a determination by HHS that continued funding is in the best interest of the government.
( c ) Neither the approval of any application nor the award of any grant commits or obligates the United States in any way to make any additional, supplemental, continuation, or other award with respect to any approved application or portion of an approved application.
1

Thomas H. Adams, Executive Director 

American Coal Ash Association 

15200 E. Girard Ave., Suite 3050 

Aurora, CO 80014 

720.870.7987 

fax – 720.870.7889 

www.acaa-usa.org 

ACAA 

Memo

To: Mathy Stanislaus, EPA Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste and Emergency Response 

From: Thomas Adams 

CC: Barry Breen, Matt Hale, John Sager 

Date: August 10, 2009 

Re: FGD Gypsum and CO2 Reduction 

During our meeting of July 24, 2009, Cliff Ramsier, Ag Spectrum Company, made a statement that use 

of FGD gypsum in agricultural applications results in reduction of carbon dioxide emissions as 

equipment used to maintain surface porosity is not operated. Further explanation of this statement was 

requested. Mr. Ramsier has expanded on his point as follows. 

There are several projects in the works that quantify the specific amount of CO2 sequestered by 

converting from tillage to no-tillage production agriculture but the best current estimates are roughly 1⁄2 

ton per acre per year. On average this would equal the rate of FDG-gypsum application 

(1,000#/acre/year – based on rainfall). Rainfall is the primary cause of surface sealing due to soil clays 

becoming dispersed since rain water does not contain adequate electrolytes – FDG-gypsum provides 

the proper electrolytes. Production agriculture requires the soil surface to remain porous (open to gas 

exchange) to enable oxidation/reduction reactions to occur. Surface sealing requires re-opening the 

soil surface with tillage but the surface porosity can be maintained by regular applications of gypsum. 

As soon as papers are available the thoroughly quantifies the amount of sequestration, I will pass them 

along. For more detail and perhaps a specific status report on these research projects you may want to 

contact Dr. Darrell Norton, USDA-ARS NSERL lab on the campus at Purdue.
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certification

 

I, Rajesh Kalathur, certify that:

 

1.            Ihave reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered bythis report on Form 10-K of John Deere Owner Trust 2020-B (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);

 

2.            Basedon my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.            Basedon my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing, and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the periodcovered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4.            Iam responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicers and based on my knowledge and the compliance reviews conductedin preparing the servicer compliance statements required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in theExchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects;and

 

5.            Allof the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports onassessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance withItem 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwisedisclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving the certifications above, I havereasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated party: U.S. Bank National Association (as indenture trustee).
The Alaska Resource Data Files  Solomon  (SO)  175 records 
**Open File Report 99-573**
The exact equivalent of the U.S.G.S. Open-File Report for this quadrangle can be viewed and printed with your browser by clicking on the following highlighted text:
Solomon pdf file (820 k) 
*(Note that the ARDF is in Adobe Acrobat format; if your computer does not have this software, it can be installed with the Acrobat icon at the bottom of this page).*
**Digital Versions of the Data**
The data was originally compiled with FileMaker Pro software; if you have Version 3.0 or later of FileMaker Pro installed on your computer, the data can be searched and manipulated through your browser by clicking on the following:
**Note:** If you have FileMaker Pro 3.0 or 4.0 use the .fp3 file format. If you have FileMaker Pro 5.0 use the .fp5 file format.
Solomon FileMaker Pro (.fp3) file (790 k)
Solomon FileMaker Pro (.fp5) file (808 k)
*(If you are going to use this file repeatedly, it may be more convenient to download it permanently to your computer rather than wait for it to download through your browser every time you wish to use it.)*
 The data can also be downloaded in a "csv" format that can be used with a variety of data base and spreadsheet programs. If you have the appropriate software that can work with csv files installed on your computer, the data can be manipulated or searched directly through your browser. *(However, see the comment in italics above for the advantages of downloading the data  onto your computer if it is to be used repeatedly).*
Solomoncomma-separated-value (.csv) file (304 k)
The reference list is provided below in a "txt" format that can be downloaded and used with a variety of word-processing software. Alternately one can simply click on the highlighted text below and extract the references to a word-processing program by cutting and pasting to another screen.
Solomon References (.txt) file (10 k)

**ARDF Home |Quad Map |Quad Table |**
<URL:http://ardf.wr.usgs.gov/quads/html/Solomon.html                        >Page maintainer: ARDF@usgs.gov
### Faulk, Scott (OST) From: Sent: To: Subject:
November 20,2013 Jessica Sanchez <sj36@hawaii.edu> Wednesday, November 20, 2013 8:45 PM EAS (OST) Kalaupapa EAS

Aloha Department ofTransportation, I am writing to support Mokulele Airline's 4-year bidto link Kalaupapato Kahului, Honolulu, Kapalua, and Ho'olehua. Mokulele is the best candidate as they have lower fares, experienced friendly agents, frequent flights, multiple islands andease ofbooking via Global Distribution System (Expedia, Travelocity, Orbitz, Priceline etc.). Itis importantwe have safe, stables & affordable service to Kalaupapa. Please select Mokulele to serve Kalaupapafor 4 years. Jessica Sanchez

1
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 2 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 6 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 7 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 1 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 3 pertaining to both patents and trademarks is placed in the grouping pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 4 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 5 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

#### § 7.40 Petition to Director to review refusal.

###### Cross Reference

Link to an amendment published at 86 FR 64334, Nov. 17, 2021.

###### Cross Reference

Link to a delay of the above amendment published at 87 FR 62032, Oct. 13, 2022.

###### Cross Reference

The amendment of Nov. 17, 2021 was delayed indefinitely at 88 FR 62463, Sept. 12, 2023.

(a) A response to the examiner's initial refusal to accept an affidavit or declaration is required before filing a petition to the Director, unless the examiner directs otherwise. *See* § 7.39(b) for the deadline for responding to an examiner's Office action.

(b) If the examiner maintains the refusal of the affidavit or declaration, the holder may file a petition to the Director to review the examiner's action. The petition must be filed within six months of the date of issuance of the action maintaining the refusal, or the Office will cancel the registration.

(c) A decision by the Director is necessary before filing an appeal or commencing a civil action in any court.

[68 FR 55769, Sept. 26, 2003, as amended at 73 FR 67776, Nov. 17, 2008]
FILED IN 1STCOURT OFAPPEALS HOUSTON. TEXAS FEB 2 5 2015 christophcraAprjne LERK Y^tT 01-13-010 >T7 do. 

## -SrHb; O^vuiUit- JoH^jo^j -l:I i/. Titerj/wrif 6 / I^yias 

# ?(mic Wo yvi^ ^ItU MMUfe ,X^.J o/O fas *»«ffiW ****• Urn* 3T m*v, i^ tue tfuctvrftft fe ^W^o w•j OTA. e-~r»».Mr-CT rvrCVT D TY~T RIO GRANDE D3STRICT 23. FEB 2015 PM 3 1

7700220&B99 |,i.,l|l|l|||..|Ml|||llM||.|||1.|.,Ulll|HII,|f|l.|.,|l|]ll|l.
#### Maria Sophie Kleb, respondent, *v.*Jean Kleb et al., appellants.

[Argued July 11th, 1906.

Decided March 4th, 1907.]

On appeal from a decree of the court of chancery, advised by Yice-Chaneellor Stevens, whose opinion is reported in *70 N. J. Fq. (4 Robb.) 865.*

*Mr. John W. Queen*and *Mr. Gilbert Collins,*for the appellants.

*Mr. Frnest F. Keer*and *Mr. Robert E.*McCarter, attorney-general, for the respondent.

Per Curiam.

The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons contained in the opinion of the learned vicerchancellor before whom the cause was heard in the court of chancery. In reaching the conclusion that the respondent, who was the complainant below, was entitled to the relief prayed for in her bill, he excluded from consideration testimony given by her as to transactions with and statements made by her deceased husband, upon the ground that the defendants were made parties because they were his heirs-at-law; conceiving that this fact brought the excluded evidence within the proviso of the fourth section of the revised act concerning evidence. *P. L. 1900 p. 863.*That proviso declares that the enabling clause in the body of the section “shall not extend to permit testimony to be given by any party to the action as to any transaction with or statement by any testator or intestate represented in said action,” &c.

As we concur with the learned vice-chancellor in the view that the other proofs in the cause fully support the décree advised *788by him, this appeal does not call for the determination by us of the question whether persons who are made parties defendant to a bill of equity for the purpose of compelling them to execute a contract made by their ancestor in his lifetime relating to lands which have descended to them as his heirs-at-law, represent their intestate within the meaning of this statutory provision.

*For*affirmance—The Chief-Justice, Garrison, Fort, Hendrickson, 'Pitney, Swayze, Reed, Trenci-iard, Bogert, Vre-DENBURGI-I, VROOM, GREEN, GRAY-13.

*For*reversal—None.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 21-0154
DENISAGUADO, 

### MAY 0 9 2022

Petitioner and Appellant,
v. STATE OF MONTANA,

Respondent and Appellee. Bowen Greenvvoucl Clerk of Supreme Court State of Montana ORDER

Appellant Denis Aguado has filed a motion for an extension oftime within which to file hisreply brief. Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant's motion for extension is GRANTED. Appellant has until May 31, 2022, within which to file his reply brief. No further extensions will be granted. DATED this 1

/ 4 j ay ofMay, 2022. Forthe Court,

ChiefJustice 05/09/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0154
110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2276 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 203 North Main Street in Vassar, Michigan, 

as the ‘‘Corporal Christopher E. Esckelson Post Office 

Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 2276 EH

1 SECTION 1. CORPORAL CHRISTOPHER E. ESCKELSON POST 

2 OFFICE BUILDING. 

3 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

4 Postal Service located at 203 North Main Street in Vas5 sar, Michigan, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Cor6 poral Christopher E. Esckelson Post Office Building’’. 

7 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg8 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

9 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

10 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Corporal Christopher 

11 E. Esckelson Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives October 1, 

2007. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2276 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostE. Esckelson Post Office Building’’. Vassar, Michigan, as the ‘‘Corporal Christopher al Service located at 203 North Main Street in
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                         841,209
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,235,346
<ALLOWANCES>                                   173,000
<INVENTORY>                                    342,580
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,742,104
<PP&E>                                      21,499,814
<DEPRECIATION>                               6,560,352
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              25,537,468
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,067,328
<BONDS>                                     15,398,135
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        82,485
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,823,569
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                25,537,468
<SALES>                                      1,924,713
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            15,647,012
<CGS>                                        1,479,636
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,479,636
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             926,480
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                237,005
<INCOME-TAX>                                    17,400
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            219,605
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   219,605
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .04
        

</TABLE>
"On Selective Independent Inspection of Concluded Export Contracts," GovernmentResolution No. 654 (May 28, 1996) (changes and addenda introduced by Government ResolutionNo. 1492 (Dec. 5, 1996))

(Excerpt)

...

"2. It is resolved to establish that particpants of foreign economic activity, irrrespectiveof their organizational legal form, shall present exported goods for pre-shipment inspection andobtain reports of results of pre-shipment inspection." 

 

Attachment 4 to Resolution of the Government No. 654, of May 28, 1996*List of Goods Exported from the Republic of Kazakstan which MayBe Submitted to a Selective Independent Inspection of Concluded Export Contracts 
Goods 
Commodity Code 
Wheat (all types)
1001
Barley
1003
Rice
1006
Hide of meat cattle or animals of horse family
4101
Hide of sheeps and lambs
4102
Thin wool (merino, non-merino, scoured and non-scoured, semi-thin, semi-rough,rough)
5101
Animal hair (thin or rough): Angora rabbit, camel, Angora goats,
5102
Cotton fiber
5201, 5203
Cotton wastes (pint)
5202
Raw materials for extracting ferrous and non-ferrous metals
2603, 2604, 2606-2610
Fertilizers
3101-3105
Leather from meat cattle hides
4104
Leather from small cattle hides
4105
Ferroalloy
7202
Rolled ferrous metal
7208-7217
Non-ferrous metals
7401-7405, 7407-7408, 7501-7502, 7504, 7601, 7603-7604, 7801, 7803, 7804, 7901,7903-7905, 8001, 8004
Flour
1101
 *
###### Editorial Note on Part 1

#### Editorial Notes:

1. In Patent and Trademark Office publications and usage the part number is omitted from the numbers of §§ 1.1 to 1.352 and the numbers to the right of the decimal point correspond with the respective rule numbers.

2. For nomenclature changes to part 1, see 68 FR 14335, Mar. 25, 2003; 87 FR 68904, Nov. 17, 2022.

#### § 1.801 Biological material.

For the purposes of these regulations pertaining to the deposit of biological material for purposes of patents for inventions under 35 U.S.C. 101, the term biological material shall include material that is capable of self-replication either directly or indirectly. Representative examples include bacteria, fungi including yeast, algae, protozoa, eukaryotic cells, cell lines, hybridomas, plasmids, viruses, plant tissue cells, lichens and seeds. Viruses, vectors, cell organelles and other non-living material existing in and reproducible from a living cell may be deposited by deposit of the host cell capable of reproducing the non-living material.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 2 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 6 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 7 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 1 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 3 pertaining to both patents and trademarks is placed in the grouping pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 4 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 5 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.