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

### HE MATT F: ) ) 

### PE P ) ) 

### 0 

### V 9 P : 

## 20

n ntAgr em 01. On ov mb r 29.2011, Respond nt

### fil d aJoint Motion to Am nd Adminislrati e mplalnt

### anel n 

### nt gr 

### m nt. Th 

### ti 

### n r que t 

### pur uant to par graph' 

### .l.aand F.l

,th gre m**nt~** 

### th I

### th mplaint 

### and nl t 

### e m 

### nt b am n 

### d t 

### in Iud a Rid pp ndi and m 

### eli I . tion ofth p nail TheRevi 

### el pp 

### neli substitute th original Appendix 

# oyreelu ing 23 soure to 15 ources in Tab!**A~** 

### 1; reducing 8 sour t 4 in Tab! 

### A-2' redu ing 22 ure 5 to 6 in Tabl



### • and, redu ing 74 UI' 

### e t 17in T bl -4. Thi 

### amendm nl r du 

### c th 

### number of



### •',i ting 

### roi i 

### 0 ure fr m 127 

### to 42 and th 

### r 

### b r du

. th 

### p n 

### It t

nl mplat db p graph**~.l** ofthe riginal dministrati e 

### mpl'm and onsenl 

### greement. Th court h r b approv the oti n 1 Am 

# nu to include the R 

### i' d Appendix A and 

### 111 modification 

### 10 par graph .1 bas 

### don th term' t th Complajnt nd ons 

### nl Agr mCI,t anelfi rg elus 

### .h wn pursuant to 

### 40

..

### R.§·2 .14c) 

### _2.1 R p nd nt i b r l ORDERED to c 

### mp!y ith all ofth term ofth \ weh 

### was ffeeti 

### n ugu t 29 

### _Oll b Final 

### rd r.
OIl.

### CERTIFI ATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies thallhc 

### original ofthe attached ORDER ON JOI T 

### MOTION TO AMEND ADMINISTRATIVE COMI'LAINT A DCONSENT AGREEMENT in the mallcrofQEP ENERGY COMPANY; DOCKET NO.: CM-OS20J1-0026, 

### was filed with the Rcgionailleuring Clerk on November29. 20 I

### J. Further, the undersigned ccrtilies thUIII Iruc and 

### comel copy of

### the document was delivered to Jim Eppers, Senior Enforcement Anomey. U... EI>A - Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop 

### Street. Denver. CO 80202-1129. True and correctcopics ofthe**~lforC'll1cntioncd** 

### documents wen:: placed inlhe 

### United Slates nmil on November30.21011, to; 

### Eric L. Dady**Vicc~Prcsident** & 

### Gcneral OliOSe! QEP Resources, Inc. 

### 1050 17'" Strect. Suitc 500 Dellver. Co 80265 And clllailcd to: 

### Elizabeth Whitsel U. S, Environmental I)rotection Agency 

### Cincinnati rinancc Cellier 

### 26 W. Martio Luther King Drive (MS-0002) 

### Cincinnati. Ohio 45268

Novcmb..:r 30. 2011

# 01?{~<--~, nu Tina**A(l~mis** 

### ParnlcgallRcgional Ilcaring Clerk
## FOREWORD

The Department of Defense has been successfully exploiting rapidly developing advances in information technology for military gain. On tomorrow's multidimensional battlefield -- or "battlespace" -- the increased density, acuity, and connectivity of sensors and many other information devices may allow U.S. Armed Forces to see almost everything worth seeing in real or near-real time. Such enhanced *vision*of the battlespace is no doubt a significant military advantage, but a question remains: How do we achieve dominant battlefield *knowledge*, namely, the ability to *understand*what we see and *act*on it decisively? 

The papers collected here address the most critical aspects of that problem -- to wit: If the United States develops the means to acquire dominant battlespace knowledge (DBK), how might that affect the way it goes to war, the circumstances under which force can and will be used, the purposes for its employment, and the resulting alterations of the global geomilitary environment? Of particular interest is how the authors view the influence of DBK in light of the shift from global to regional stability issues that marks the post-Cold War world. 

While no definitive answer has yet emerged, it is clear that the implications of so profound a change in military technology are critical to the structure and function of the U.S. Armed Forces. In working toward a definitive answer, the authors of this volume make an important contribution to a debate whose resolution will shape the decades to come. 

##### Ervin J. Rokke

Lieutenant General, USAF 

President, National Defense University 

----

| DBK Index |
§ 354.2 Novel questions. ( a ) *Mandatory referrals.* If the material question of substantive law described in § 354.1(a) is a novel question of law, referral to the Register of Copyrights by the Copyright Royalty Judges is mandatory. A “novel question of law” is a question of law that has not been determined in the prior decisions, determinations, or rulings under the Copyright Act of the Copyright Royalty Judges, the Librarian of Congress, the Register of Copyrights, the Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panels (to the extent they are consistent with the current decisions, determinations, or rulings of the Register of Copyrights or the Librarian of Congress), or the former Copyright Royalty Tribunal.
( b ) *Procedures.* The procedures set forth for the discretionary referral of material questions of copyright law to the Register of Copyrights by the Copyright Royalty Judges, set forth in § 354.1, shall also govern the mandatory referral of novel questions, except that the Register of Copyrights' decision will be timely if it is delivered to the Copyright Royalty Judges within 30 days after the Register of Copyrights has received all of the briefs or comments of the participants. The Copyright Royalty Judges will not issue a final determination in a proceeding where the referral of a novel question to the Register of Copyrights under this part is pending, unless this 30-day period has expired. The legal interpretation embodied in the timely delivered response of the Register of Copyrights in resolving material questions of substantive law is binding upon the Copyright Royalty Judges and will be applied by them in their final determination in the relevant proceeding.
[70 FR 30905, May 31, 2005, as amended at 71 FR 53331, Sept. 11, 2006]
SERVED MAY 16, 2011 

::.Si"MENTOi-

•;>;-[;OR!A[ipN^^ 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ;" :BA!lGNj 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC H I -^ 1- 3b 

IN THE MATTER OF 

AIRLIFT HELICOPTERS, INC. 

FAA DOCKET NO. [TO BE ASSIGNED] 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

FDMS NO. FAA-2011-0293 

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING 

This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2010WP910098) has been 

assigned to Administrative Law Judge Richard C. Goodwin. All future pleadings and 

other communications regarding this proceeding shall be served on the Judge, the FAA 

Hearing Docket, and the other persons on the attached Service List. 

Ronnfe A. Yoder 

Chief Administrative Law J 

Attachment - Service List 
"'W^-W^' T'fl''•"!-'*'f'f 

GRIG] 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket CI 

Wilbur Wright Bull 

Justin Seyferth, President/CEO 

Airlill Helicopters, Inc. 

550 West Plumb Lane, B#401 

Reno, NV 89509 

TEU 7J75-825-4447 

FAX: 775-359-7930 

Nicholas R. Milliard, Complainant's 

Att^r|tt«>y, JEnforcement Division, A< 

bffie^ of Chief Counsel 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 ' " 'j ^ ^^ 

TEL: 202-267-3452 

FAX: 202-267-5106 

The Honorable Richard C. Good 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportatipn , -j 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor, Room El | 

WasWhgton, DC 20590 

• TEL: 202-366-2139 Attomey-AdvijifS|. 

202-366-5121 Legal Assistatttjfr" 

FAX: 202-366-7536 '-'• ,-rw ^m?,^ 

FDMS No. ¥AM20} 1 -0293 

y^'f- "i(iCivil Penalty A^ioli) 

Judge 

' Service was by U.S. Mail. For 

addit^: Federal Aviation AdministxaticiB, 

Suite 2W1000, Washington, DC 20591, 

"'C nc 

coiine|,«(j0. 

AGC430. 

'-•-^ f
§ 4.125 Diagnosis of mental disorders. ( a ) If the diagnosis of a mental disorder does not conform to DSM-5 or is not supported by the findings on the examination report, the rating agency shall return the report to the examiner to substantiate the diagnosis. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), American Psychiatric Association (2013), is incorporated by reference into this section with the approval of the Director of the Federal Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To enforce any edition other than that specified in this section, the Department of Veterans Affairs must publish notice of change in the Federal Register and the material must be available to the public. All approved material is available from the American Psychiatric Association, 1000 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1825, Arlington, VA 22209-3901, 703-907-7300, *http://www.dsm5.org .* It is also available for inspection at the Office of Regulation Policy and Management, Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW., Room 1068, Washington, DC 20420. It is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this information at NARA, call 202-741-6030 or go to *http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_publications.html .*
( b ) If the diagnosis of a mental disorder is changed, the rating agency shall determine whether the new diagnosis represents progression of the prior diagnosis, correction of an error in the prior diagnosis, or development of a new and separate condition. If it is not clear from the available records what the change of diagnosis represents, the rating agency shall return the report to the examiner for a determination.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1155)
[61 FR 52700, Oct. 8, 1996, as amended at 79 FR 45099, Aug. 4, 2014]
§ 21.130 Educational and vocational courses outside the United States. ( a ) *General.* VA may provide educational and vocational courses outside a State if the case manager determines that such training is in the best interest of the veteran and the Federal Government.
( b ) *Specific conditions.* ( 1 ) The training must be necessary to enable the veteran to qualify for, obtain, and retain suitable employment in the occupational objective; and
( 2 ) Either: ( i ) The training is not available in the United States; or
( ii ) The training is available in the United States, but personal hardship would result from requiring that the veteran pursue training in this country; and
( 3 ) All necessary supportive and follow-up services, including medical care and treatment and employment services, reasonably can be provided by or through VA, considering such factors as the availability, accessibility and cost of such services.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3114)
[49 FR 40814, Oct. 18, 1984, as amended at 55 FR 27822, July 6, 1990]
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

February 26, 2021

No. 04-20-00597-CR

Richard LARES,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 399th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2006-CR-10110

Honorable Juanita A. Vasquez-Gardner, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice 

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice 

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

On January 15, 2021, appellant filed a pro se “Motion for Disclosure and Copy of 

Documents Pursuant to United States Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments.” On February 

17, 2021, we issued a memorandum opinion and order in this appeal dismissing the appeal for 

lack of jurisdiction. After consideration, we DENY the motion AS MOOT.

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 26th day of February, 2021.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
§ 21.7303 Revision of decisions. The revision of a decision on which an action was predicated is subject to the following sections: ( a ) Clear and unmistakable error, § 3.105(a) of this chapter; and
( b ) Difference of opinion, § 3.105(b) of this chapter.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 511; Pub. L. 98-525)
<PAGE>
                                  EXHIBIT 32(I)

                               COMM BANCORP, INC.

                             CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

William F. Farber, Sr., the President and Chief Executive Officer of Comm
Bancorp, Inc., (the "Company"), hereby certifies that to the best of his
knowledge:

1.   The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2005, of
     the Company (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of section
     13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15
     U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

2.   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company
     at the dates and for the periods indicated.

The foregoing certification is being furnished pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
document.


Date: August 10, 2005                   /s/ William F. Farber, Sr.
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        William F. Farber, Sr.
                                        President and Chief Executive Officer

A signed copy of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company and will be retained
by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.


                                       53
#### § 53.2 Definitions.

For the purpose of this part:

*Nurse* means an individual who is a registered nurse, a licensed practical nurse, a licensed vocational nurse, or a nursing assistant certified in the State in which payment is made and who is a bedside caregiver at least a majority of the time (e.g., this would generally not include an individual acting in the capacity of an advance practice nurse, an administrative nurse, or a director of nursing) (the terms *nurses* and *nursing* shall be construed consistent with this definition).

*State* means each of the several States, Territories, and possessions of the United States, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.

*State representative* means the official designated in accordance with State authority with responsibility for matters relating to payments under this part.

*State Veterans Home (SVH)* means a home approved by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) which a State established primarily for veterans disabled by age, disease, or otherwise, who by reason of such disability are incapable of earning a living. A SVH may provide domiciliary care, nursing home care, adult day health care, and hospital care. Hospital care may be provided only when the SVH also provides domiciliary and/or nursing home care.

(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 101, 501, 1744)
Order entered January 17, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05
- 12
- 01160
- CR
MARLON LALL, Appellant
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 439th Judicial District Court Rockwall County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2
- 12
- 33 

### O RDER
The Court ORDERS the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine why appellant’s brief has not been filed. In this regard, the trial court shall make appropriate findings and recommendations and determine whether appellant de sires to prosecute the appeal, whether appellant is indigent, or if not indigent, whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeal. See
T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 38.8( b ). If the trial court cannot obtain appellant’s presence at the hearing, the trial court shall conduct the hearing in appellant’s absence. See Meza v. State , 742 S.W.2d 708 (Tex. App.

– Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.) (per curiam). If appellant is indigent, the trial court is ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective repres entation, which may include appointment of new counsel.We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record of the proceedings, which shall include written findings and recommendations, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this order. This appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with the above order. The appeal shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are received, whichever is earlier.

/s/ LANA MYERS JUSTICE
Exhibit 4.49

 

POWER OF ATTORNEY

 

I,  Zhu Huilong, citizen of the People’s Republic of China (the “PRC”), PRC ID card number , hereby irrevocably authorize any individual appointed, in writing, by 1Verge Internet Technology (Beijing) Co., Ltd. (WFOE), who is approved by Youku Tudou Inc. (“Authorizee”), to the extent permitted by the PRC Law, as my sole attorney to solely exercise, in the manner as approved by Youku Tudou Inc., the following powers and rights during the term of this Power of Attorney (“POA”) pursuant to Section 3.5 of the Business Operations Agreement entered into among WFOE, Heyi Pictures Inc. (“Heyi Pictures”),  1Verge Information Technology (Beijing) Co., Ltd. and I on December 22, 2014 (the “Operations Agreement”):

 

I hereby authorize and designate the Authorizee to vote on my behalf at the shareholders’ meetings of Heyi Pictures and exercise the full voting rights as its shareholder as granted to me by law and under the Articles of Association of Heyi Pictures, including but not limited to, the right to propose the holding of shareholders’ meeting, to accept any notification about the holding and discussion procedure of the meeting, to attend the shareholders’ meeting of Heyi Pictures and exercise the full voting rights (such as, my authorized representative on the shareholders’ meeting of the company, to designate and appoint the executive director or directors of the Board and the general manager and to decide the allotment of the profits, etc.), to sell or transfer any or all of my shares of Heyi Pictures.

 

The authorization I granted to WFOE can be re-authorized or assigned to any third party without my consent.  In exercising the rights and powers provided hereunder, the Authorizee shall act with due care and diligence and pursuant to this POA and the applicable laws.

 

The POA shall take effect retrospectively from October 1, 2014 and will remain effective as long as Heyi Pictures exists.

 

 

	
 
    	
Zhu Huilong
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
/s/ Zhu Huilong
    
	
 
    	
Date:   December 22, 2014
MECHANICS’ LIEN.

[Lake Circuit Court,

October Term, 1885.]

Laubie, Frazier and Woodbury, J J.

#### Woodman v. Richardson et al.

Libn Dates from First Item in Account.

A mechanics’ lien dates from the first item in the account, and if the lienholder files his attested account for record within the time provided for by statute, such lien will have priority over a mortgage filed for record any time subsequent to the date of the first item in said account.

Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Lake county.

Alvord & Alvord, for plaintiff in error.

G. W. Baptiste, for defendant in error.

Frazier, J.

These are the facts: King and McMakin hold mortgages on the land of Richardson. Woodman had sold Richardson lumber which was used in constructing a building on said land. The first item of lumber was sold to Richardson before the said mortgages were executed; but the mortgages were executed, delivered and recorded before Woodman had taken any steps towards perfecting his mechanics’ lien for the materials so furnished.

Woodman, however, filed his attested account for record, before the expiration of the four months provided for by law, within which he might file it, and have the same become a valid lien on the premises.

The common pleas court held that the mortgages were prior to the mechanics’ lien, for the reason that they were first filed for record. We think that the court below erred in so holding.

The mechanics’ lien should have priority over both these mortgages. It does not matter that the mortgagees got their mortgages *first on*record, so long as the lienholder filed his account within the proper time, providing the first item of his account was sold before the execution and filing of the mortgages.

As between the mortgages, the first on file would have priority, but as a mechanics’ lien dates from the first item of the account, the mortgage must be filed for record before the date of such item, in order to give it priority over the lien — if the lienholder has complied with the statute.
§ 21.9550 Entitlement. ( a ) Subject to the provisions of § 21.4020 and this section, an eligible individual is entitled to a maximum of 36 months of educational assistance (or its equivalent in part-time educational assistance) under 38 U.S.C. chapter 33.
( b ) ( 1 ) An individual who, as of August 1, 2009, has used entitlement under 38 U.S.C. chapter 30, but retains unused entitlement under that chapter, makes an irrevocable election to receive educational assistance under the provisions of 38 U.S.C. chapter 33 instead of educational assistance under the provisions of chapter 30, will be limited to one month (or partial month) of entitlement under chapter 33 for each month (or partial month) of unused entitlement under chapter 30 (including any months of chapter 30 entitlement previously transferred to a dependent that the individual has revoked).
( 2 ) An individual, who as of August 1, 2009, was eligible under 38 U.S.C. chapter 30, had not used any entitlement under that program, was making contributions towards chapter 30, or was a servicemember who would have been eligible for chapter 30 if he or she had not declined participation, will receive 36 months of entitlement under chapter 33.
( c ) Except as provided in §§ 21.9560(d), 21.9570(m), and 21.9635(o), no individual is entitled to more than 36 months of full-time educational assistance under 38 U.S.C. chapter 33.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3034(a), 3312(a), 3323(a), 3695; Pub. L. 110-252, 122 Stat. 2377)