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

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2396 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2396

 To increase the capacity of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 21, 2007

  Mr. Hall of Texas (for himself, Mr. Pickering, Mr. Lampson, and Mr. 
 Barton of Texas) introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                  the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To increase the capacity of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and for 
                            other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. INCREASE IN CAPACITY.

    (a) The Energy Policy and Conservation Act is amended--
            (1) in section 151(b) (42 U.S.C. 6231(b)) by striking ``1'' 
        and inserting ``1.5''; and
            (2) in section 154(a) (42 U.S.C. 6234(a)) by striking ``1'' 
        and inserting ``1.5''.
    (b) Section 301(e) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 6240 
note) is amended by striking ``1,000,000,000'' and inserting 
``1,500,000,000''.
                                 <all>
```
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

March 29, 2016

d0321 

# Order

Clerk March 29, 2016

151066(62)(63)(64)(65)

PEOPLE OF THE ST ATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 151066

COA: 317174

Oakland CC: 2013

- 244609

- FH

MICHAEL JEROME CARROLL,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion to add issue is GRANTED. The motion for

reconsideration of this Court’s September 29, 2015 order is considered, and it is

DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was entered erroneously. The motion

for oral argument and the motion to remand are DENIED.
§ 61.53 Technical assistance grant application packages—rating criteria. ( a ) *General.* Applicants that meet the threshold requirements in § 61.52 will then be rated using the selection criteria listed in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section. To be eligible for a technical assistance grant, an applicant must receive at least 600 points (out of a possible 800).
( b ) *Quality of the technical assistance.* VA will award up to 400 points based on the following: ( 1 ) How the recipients of technical training will increase their skill level regarding the completion of applications;
( 2 ) How the recipients of technical training will learn to find grant opportunities in a timely manner;
( 3 ) How the technical assistance provided will be monitored and evaluated and changes made, if needed; and
( 4 ) How the proposed technical assistance programs will be implemented in a timely fashion.
( c ) *Ability of applicant to demonstrate expertise in preparing grant applications and to develop and operate a technical assistance program.* VA will award up to 400 points based on the extent to which the application demonstrates all of the following: ( 1 ) Ability to find grants available for addressing the needs of homeless veterans.
( 2 ) Ability to find and offer technical assistance to entities eligible for such assistance.
( 3 ) Ability to administer a technical assistance program.
( 4 ) Ability to provide grant technical assistance.
( 5 ) Ability to evaluate the overall effectiveness of the technical assistance program and to make adjustments, if necessary, based on those evaluations.
( 6 ) Past performance. VA may use historical documents of past performance from both VA and non-VA, including those from other Federal, state and local agencies and audits by private or public entities in scoring technical assistance applications.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 2064)
###### Editorial Note on Part 3

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 3 appear at 61 FR 7216, Feb. 27, 1996; 62 FR 35970, July 3, 1997; 62 FR 47532, Sept. 9, 1997; and 67 FR 46868, July 17, 2002.

#### § 3.453 Veterans compensation or service pension or retirement pay.

Rates of apportionment of disability compensation, service pension or retirement pay will be determined under § 3.451.

[26 FR 7266, Aug. 11, 1961]
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                            5
<MULTIPLIER>                     1,000
                       
<S>
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               Dec-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                    Mar-31-1997
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-mos
<CASH>                           1,821
<SECURITIES>                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                   24,096
<ALLOWANCES>                       425
<INVENTORY>                     28,180
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                57,091
<PP&E>                          50,499
<DEPRECIATION>                  24,771
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  84,407
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           19,187
<BONDS>                              0      
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                0
<PREFERRED>                          0
<COMMON>                           592
<OTHER-SE>                      56,432
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    84,407
<SALES>                         41,819
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   32,350
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                 6,077
<LOSS-PROVISION>                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                 157
<INCOME-PRETAX>                  3,232
<INCOME-TAX>                     1,066
<INCOME-CONTINUING>              2,166
<DISCONTINUED>                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                      0
<CHANGES>                            0
<NET-INCOME>                     2,166
<EPS-PRIMARY>                      .25
<EPS-DILUTED>                      .25
        

</TABLE>
§ 42.10 Default upon failure to file an answer. ( a ) If the defendant does not file an answer within the time prescribed in § 42.9(a) of this part, the reviewing official may refer the complaint to the ALJ.
( b ) Upon the referral of the complaint, the ALJ shall promptly serve on the defendant in the manner prescribed in § 42.8 of this part, a notice that an initial decision will be issued under this section.
( c ) The ALJ shall assume the facts alleged in the complaint to be true, and, if such facts establish liability under § 42.3 of this part, the ALJ shall issue an initial decision imposing the maximum amount of penalties and assessments allowed under the statute.
( d ) Except as otherwise provided in this section, by failing to file a timely answer, the defendant waives any right to further review of the penalties and assessments imposed under paragraph (c) of this section, and the initial decision shall become final and binding upon the parties 30 days after it is issued.
( e ) If, before the initial decision becomes final, the defendant files a motion with the ALJ seeking to reopen on the grounds that extraordinary circumstances prevented the defendant from filing an answer, the initial decision shall be stayed pending the ALJ's decision on the motion.
( f ) If, on such motion, the defendant can demonstrate extraordinary circumstances excusing the failure to file a timely answer, the ALJ shall withdraw the initial decision in paragraph (c) of this section, if the decision has been issued, and shall grant the defendant an opportunity to answer the complaint.
( g ) A decision of the ALJ denying a defendant's motion under paragraph (e) of this section is not subject to reconsideration under § 42.38 of this part.
( h ) The defendant may appeal to the Secretary the decision denying a motion to reopen by filing a notice of appeal with the Secretary within 15 days after the ALJ denies the motion. The timely filing of a notice of appeal shall stay the initial decision until the Secretary decides the issue.
( i ) If the defendant files a timely notice of appeal with the Secretary, the ALJ shall forward the record of the proceeding to the Secretary.
( j ) The Secretary shall decide expeditiously whether extraordinary circumstances excuse the defendant's failure to file a timely answer based solely on the record before the ALJ.
( k ) If the Secretary decides that extraordinary circumstances excuse the defendant's failure to file a timely answer, the Secretary shall remand the case to the ALJ with instructions to grant the defendant an opportunity to answer.
( l ) If the Secretary decides that the defendant's failure to file a timely answer is not excused, the Secretary shall reinstate the initial decision of the ALJ, which shall become final and binding upon the parties 30 days after the authority head issues such decision.
# L_2013232EN.01S00302.xml

| 30.8.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 232/s3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.8.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 232/s3

---

NOTE TO READERS — WAY OF REFERRING TO ACTS

As of 1 July 2013 the way of referring to acts has changed.

During a transitional period this new practice will coexist with the previous one.

---
§ 17.902 Preauthorization. ( a ) Preauthorization from VA is required for the following services or benefits under §§ 17.900 through 17.905: Rental or purchase of durable medical equipment with a total rental or purchase price in excess of $300, respectively; day health care provided as outpatient care; dental services; homemaker services; outpatient mental health services in excess of 23 visits in a calendar year; substance abuse treatment; training; transplantation services; and travel (other than mileage at the General Services Administration rate for privately owned automobiles). Authorization will only be given in spina bifida cases where it is demonstrated that the care is medically necessary. In cases of other covered birth defects, authorization will only be given where it is demonstrated that the care is medically necessary and related to the covered birth defects. Requests for provision of health care requiring preauthorization shall be made to the Health Administration Center and may be made by telephone, facsimile, mail, or hand delivery. The application must contain the following: ( 1 ) Name of child,
( 2 ) Child's Social Security number,
( 3 ) Name of veteran,
( 4 ) Veteran's Social Security number,
( 5 ) Type of service requested,
( 6 ) Medical justification,
( 7 ) Estimated cost, and
( 8 ) Name, address, and telephone number of provider.
( b ) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section, preauthorization is not required for a condition for which failure to receive immediate treatment poses a serious threat to life or health. Such emergency care should be reported by telephone to the Health Administration Center within 72 hours of the emergency.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 101(2), 1802-1803, 1811-1813, 1831)
(The Office of Management and Budget has approved the information collection requirements in this section under control number 2900-0219) [68 FR 1010, Jan. 8, 2003, as amended at 76 FR 4249, Jan. 25, 2011; 81 FR 19890, Apr. 6, 2016]
§ 382.2 Scope and compliance. ( a ) *Scope.* This part codifies rates and terms of royalty payments for the public performance of sound recordings in certain Digital Audio Transmissions by certain Licensees in accordance with applicable provisions of 17 U.S.C. 114 and for the making of Ephemeral Recordings by those Licensees in accordance with the provisions of 17 U.S.C. 112(e), during the period January 1, 2018, through December 31, 2027.
( b ) *Legal compliance.* Licensees relying upon the statutory licenses set forth in 17 U.S.C. 112(e) and 114 must comply with the requirements of 17 U.S.C. 112(e) and 114, this part and any other applicable regulations.
( c ) *Voluntary agreements.* Notwithstanding the royalty rates and terms established in any subparts of this part, the rates and terms of any license agreements entered into by Copyright Owners and Licensees may apply in lieu of these rates and terms.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

RULES 13a-14(a) AND 15d-14(a) UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Earl Hunt, Chief Executive Officer of Apollo Debt Solutions BDC, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Apollo Debt Solutions BDC (the “registrant”);




2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;




3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;




4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:




(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;




(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and




(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and




5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of trustees (or persons performing the equivalent function):


(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.


Dated: March 16, 2023

|    |                        
|--- | -----------------------
|By: | /s/ Earl Hunt          
|    | Earl Hunt              
|    | Chief Executive Officer







---
41809.

#### SMITH v. SMITH et al.

Pannell, Judge.

1. “A notice of appeal shall be filed within 30 days after entry of the appealable decision or judgment complained of” (§ 5 of the Appellate Practice Act of 1965, Ga. L. 1965, pp. 18, 21; *Code Ann.*§ 6-803), (a) unless the time for filing is extended under the terms of § 6 of said Act *(Code Ann.*§ 6-804), which, in part, is as follows: “Any judge of the trial court, or any justice or judge of the appellate court to which the appeal is to be taken may, in his discretion, and without motion or notice to the other party, grant extensions of time for the filing of . . . notice of appeal, . . . and provided further, only one extension of time shall be granted for filing of notice of appeal and notice of cross appeal, and the extension shall not exceed the time otherwise allowed by these rules for the filing of the notices initially. . . ”; or, (b) unless the last day of filing falls on Saturday or Sunday, in which event the time for filing is extended through the following Monday. Subsection 8 of *Code*§ 102-102, as amended by the Act of 1958 (Ga. L. 1958, pp. 388, 389; *Code Ann.*§ 102-102.)

2. Under § 6 of the Appellate Practice Act, neither the trial court nor this court has jurisdiction to grant an extension of more than 30 days for the filing of a notice of appeal.

3. It follows, therefore, that, even though the order in the present case extending the time for filing the notice of appeal be construed as granting more than 30 days extension, the notice of appeal, having been filed 71 days after entry of the appealable decision or judgment complained of, comes too late, and the motion to dismiss must be sustained. *Windsor v. Southeastern*Adjusters, 221 Ga. 329 (144 SE2d 739); *Yost v. Gunby,*221 Ga. 552 (145 SE2d 575); *Undercofler v. McLennan,*221 Ga. 613 (146 SE2d 635); *Close v. Walker Land Corp.,*221 Ga. 329, 330 (2) (145 SE2d 245); *Stanford*
      *112
      *v. Evans, Reed & Williams,*221 Ga. 331 (145 SE2d 504); *Williams v. State,*112 Ga. App. 566 (145 SE2d 765); *Rhett v. State,*112 Ga. App. 567 (145 SE2d 823).

Argued February 7, 1966

Decided February 10, 1966.

*Fred T. Allen,*for appellant.

*W. D. Knight, E. R. Smith, Sr.,*for appellees.

*Appeal dismissed.*

*Felton, C. J., and Frankum, J., concur.*
p.1 

OAR Box 1828 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

30) ll-K- (B)-18 

Docket Number: 

A-83-27 

Printed 11/12/2008 11:12:49 AM Sheet 30 of 325 
P.2 

*-„ 

II-K-(B)-18 

SUMMARY OF THE CHANGES IN IFCAM MODEL INPUTS AND 

ASSUMPTIONS. 

Letter from E. Medine, EEA to A. Wehe, EPArSASD. 

December 17, 1979. 

THIS INFORMATION CAN BE FOUND IN DOCKET A-79-02, ITEM 

II-K-(B)-18
11 TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND

, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

David Hilton and Cindy Hilton, * From the 350 th District Court

of Taylor County,

Trial Court No. 12750

- D

.

Vs. No. 11

- 2 2

- 00 262

- CV * March 16, 2023

5J Oilfield Services, LLC

, * Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

(P anel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,

Trotter , J. , and Williams, J.)

This court has considered the parties’ joint motion to dismiss this appeal and

concludes that the motion should be granted. Therefore, in accordance with this

court’s opinion, the appeal is dismissed. The costs incurred by reason of this

appeal are taxed against the party incurring same

.
|   | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--------|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: | August 16,  2010                                                                                                                                 |   |
|-------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| By:   | /s/ David W. Brenman David W. BrenmanChief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer(principal executive officer and principal financial officer) |   |
|  |  |                                                                                                                   |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|--|--|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|
|  |  |                                                                                                                   |  |  |
|  |  |                                                                                                                   |
|  |  | /s/ David Viney                                                                                           |  |
|  |  | David Viney                                                                                                       |  |
|  |  | Vice President and Treasurer of Harley-Davidson Credit Corp., Servicer to Harley-Davidson Motorcycle Trust 2021-A |  |
|  |  |                                                                                                                   |  |
# Official Journal C 259/2007

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 259 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5031 October 2007 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 259

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5031 October 2007

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES |
| | Court of Auditors |
| 2007/C 259/01 | Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on the activities funded by the sixth, seventh, eighth and ninth European Development Funds (EDFs) concerning the financial year 2006, together with the Commission’s replies | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES

Court of Auditors

2007/C 259/01

Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on the activities funded by the sixth, seventh, eighth and ninth European Development Funds (EDFs) concerning the financial year 2006, together with the Commission’s replies

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-6529

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

ALVIS DAMON WILLIAMS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at 

Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Senior District Judge. (3:13-cr-00758-JFA-1)

Submitted: November 18, 2021 Decided: December 6, 2021

Before WYNN, FLOYD and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Alvis Damon Williams, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Alvis Damon Williams appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for 

compassionate release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), as amended by the First Step 

Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-391, § 603(b)(1), 132 Stat. 5194, 5239, and the court’s order 

denying his motion for discovery. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised 

in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Williams’ informal brief does not 

challenge the district court’s denial of his motion for compassionate release, he has 

forfeited appellate review of that order, and we affirm. See Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 

170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important document; under Fourth 

Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief.”). As for the court’s 

order denying Williams’ motion for discovery, we have reviewed the record and find no 

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United 

States v. Williams, No. 3:13-cr-00758-JFA-1 (D.S.C. Mar. 25, 2021). We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED