alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Betty H. CARNEY *v.*Maupin CUMMINGS, Judge

75-65

524 S.W. 2d 623

Opinion delivered June 30, 1975

*J. Wesley Sampler,*for petitioner.

Lyle Brown, Justice.

This is a petition for writ of prohibition asking this court to enjoin the circuit judge of Washington County from proceeding further in a suit for malicious prosecution. There is no dispute about the facts. Plaintiff in the court below alleged in a complaint for malicious prosecution that the petitioner here (defendant below) is a resident of Benton County. The record discloses that service of summons was had in Benton County. Petitioner argues that by reason of her residence in Benton County, and the service of summons upon her in Benton County, the venue is not in Washington County and that Benton County is the correct and only venue of an action of malicious prosecution against her.

Service of summons in this case is governed by Ark. Stat. Ann. § 27-613 (Repl. 1962) which says: “Every other action may be brought in any county in which the defendant, or one of several defendants, resides, or is summoned.” In other words the proper venue for the filing of this cause is in the county of petitioner’s residence or in a county where she may be served with summons, under the provision of the quoted section.

A case very much in point is *Baker*v. *Fraser,*209 Ark. 932, 193 S.W. 2d 131 (1946). In that case Baker filed a civil action *363for libel in Independence County against Fraser and other parties. The three defendants were all residents of Pulaski County and this court held that the filing of the suit in Independence County and obtaining service in Pulaski County was of no avail. It was held that libel is a transitory action and must be brought in the county where one of the defendants resides or where they may be served with summons. Another case in point is that of *International Harvester*v. *Brown, Judge,*241 Ark. 452, 408 S.W. 2d 504 (1966).

Writ granted.
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 173 (Monday, September 8, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53192-53193]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-21299]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9916-29-OAR]

Clean Air Act Advisory Committee (CAAAC): Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice; meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announces upcoming 
public meetings of the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee (CAAAC). The

[[Page 53193]]

EPA established the CAAAC on November 19, 1990, to provide independent 
advice and counsel to EPA on policy issues associated with 
implementation of the Clean Air Act of 1990. The Committee advises on 
economic, environmental, technical, scientific and enforcement policy 
issues.

DATES & ADDRESSES: Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. App. 2 Section 10(a)(2), notice 
is hereby given that the CAAAC will hold its next face-to-face meeting 
on October 29, 2014, tentatively from 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. at the 
Holiday Inn and Suites Alexandria, 625 First Street, Alexandria, VA 
22314. The Permits, New Source Review and Toxics Subcommittee will meet 
at the same location on October 28, 2014, tentatively from 1:30 p.m. to 
4:30 p.m.
    Inspection of Committee Documents: The Committee agenda, confirmed 
times for the meetings, and any documents prepared for these meetings 
will be publicly available on the CAAAC Web site at http://www.epa.gov/oar/caaac/ prior to the meeting. Thereafter, these documents, together 
with CAAAC meeting minutes, will also be available on the CAAAC Web 
site or by contacting the Office of Air and Radiation Docket and 
requesting information under docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0075. The Docket 
office can be reached by email at: a-and-r-Docket@epa.gov or FAX: 202-
566-9744.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For more information about the CAAAC, 
please contact Jeneva Craig, Designated Federal Officer (DFO), Office 
of Air and Radiation, U.S. EPA by email at craig.jeneva@epa.gov or by 
telephone at (202) 564-1674 or, for information on the Permits, New 
Source Review and Toxics Subcommittee, please contact Alan Rush at 
rush.alan@epa.gov or (202) 564-1658. Additional information on these 
meetings, CAAAC, and its Subcommittees can be found on the CAAAC Web 
site: http://www.epa.gov/oar/caaac/.
    For information on access or services for individuals with 
disabilities, please contact Jeneva Craig at (202) 564-1674 or 
craig.jeneva@epa.gov, preferably at least 10 days prior to the meetings 
to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request.

    Dated: August 26, 2014.
Jeneva Craig,
Designated Federal Officer, Clean Air Act Advisory Committee, Office of 
Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2014-21299 Filed 9-5-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```
#### § 1251.1 Purpose.

The purpose of this part is to implement a prohibition against an Enterprise redirecting the cost of any allocation to the Housing Trust Fund or the Capital Magnet Fund to originators of mortgages purchased or securitized by an Enterprise.
§ 1075.109 When payments to victims are impracticable. ( a ) *Individual payments.* Making a payment to an individual victim will be deemed impracticable if: ( 1 ) The payment to the victim would be of such a small amount that the victim would not be likely to redeem the payment;
( 2 ) The payment to the victim is too small to justify the cost of locating the victim and making the payment;
( 3 ) The victim cannot be located with effort that is reasonable in light of the amount of the payment;
( 4 ) The victim does not timely submit information that a distribution plan requires to be submitted before a payment will be made;
( 5 ) The victim does not redeem the payment within a reasonable time; or
( 6 ) The Fund Administrator determines that other circumstances make it unreasonable to make a payment to the victim.
( b ) *Payments to a class of victims.* Making payments to a class of victims will be deemed impracticable if: ( 1 ) The expected aggregate actual payment to the class of victims is too small to justify the costs of locating the victims in the class and making payments to them;
( 2 ) It would be impracticable under paragraph (a) of this section to make a payment to any victim in the class; or
( 3 ) The Fund Administrator determines that other circumstances make it unreasonable to make payments to the class.
#### § 23.130 Effect of employment opportunities.

The obligation to comply with these Title IX regulations is not obviated or alleviated because employment opportunities in any occupation or profession are or may be more limited for members of one sex than for members of the other sex.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

JOHN SCOTT SUTHERLAND ABBOTT

,

Appellant

,

v. Case No. 5D 14

- 4617

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

.

________________________________/

Opinion filed June 14, 2016

Appeal from the Circuit Court

for La ke County

, Lawrence J. Semento , Judge.

Justin M. Bleakley, Orlando, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General,

Tallahassee, and Kristen L. Davenport,

Assistant Attorney General, Daytona

Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM

.

AFFIRMED. See State v. Liles , 41 F la. L. Weekly D892 ( F la. 5th DCA Apr. 8,

2016).

PALMER, TORPY and EVANDER , JJ., concur.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Commerce

          - [Docket No.: 0909181309-91314-01]

# AGENCY:

Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).

# ACTION:

Notice; COMMERCE/NIST-6, Participants in Experiments, Studies, and Surveys.

# SUMMARY:

The Department of Commerce (Commerce) publishes this notice to announce the effective date of a Privacy Act System of Records notice entitled COMMERCE/NIST-6, Participants in Experiments, Studies, and Surveys.

# DATES:

The system of records becomes effective on October 1, 2009.

# ADDRESSES:

For a copy of the system of records please mail requests to Catherine S. Fletcher, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive—Stop 1710, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-1710.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Catherine S. Fletcher, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive—Stop 1710, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-1710.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

On June 1, 2007, the National Institute of Standards and Technology published and requested comments on a proposed Privacy Act System of Records notice entitled COMMERCE/NIST-6, Participants in Experiments, Studies, and Surveys. No comments were received in response to the request for comments. By this notice, the National Institute of Standards and Technology is adopting the proposed system as final without changes effective October 1, 2009.

Dated: September 25, 2009.

Brenda Dolan,

U.S. Department of Commerce, Freedom of Information/Privacy Act Officer.

[FR Doc. E9-23671 Filed 9-30-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-13-P
EXHIBIT 32.2

          CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In connection  with the quarterly  report of IR  BioSciences  Holdings,
Inc. (the  "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
the  undersigned,  in the capacities and on the dates  indicated  below,  hereby
certifies,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

         (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.


/s/ Eric Hopkins
----------------------------
Eric Hopkins
Chief Financial Officer
August 23, 2004

A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 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.
§ 1301.9 Classified information. ( a ) *Referrals of requests for classified information.* Whenever a request is made for a record containing information that has been classified, or may be appropriate for classification, by another agency under Executive Order 13526 or any other executive order concerning the classification of records, the Council shall refer the responsibility for responding to the request regarding that information to the agency that classified the information, should consider the information for classification, or has the primary interest in it, as appropriate. Whenever a record contains information that has been derivatively classified by the Council because it contains information classified by another agency, the Council shall refer the responsibility for responding to the request regarding that information to the agency that classified the underlying information or shall consult with that agency prior to processing the record for disclosure or withholding.
( b ) *Determination of continuing need for classification of information.* Requests for information classified pursuant to Executive Order 13526 require the Council to review the information to determine whether it continues to warrant classification. Information which no longer warrants classification under the Executive Order's criteria shall be declassified and made available to the requester, unless the information is otherwise exempt from disclosure.
Exh101to2Q10Q




Exhibit 10.1

712 Fifth Avenue
New York, New York 10019
(212) 957-5003


    


January 28, 2015






PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL




Mr. Harvey R. Blau
c/o Griffon Corporation
712 Fifth Avenue
NY, NY 10019


Dear Harvey:


Reference is hereby made to your employment agreement dated as of July 1, 2001 between you and Griffon Corporation, as amended to date (the “Agreement”).  Notwithstanding any provision in the Agreement to the contrary, the term of the Consulting Period, as defined therein, is hereby extended to April 1, 2021.


Except as expressly modified herein, the terms and provisions of your consulting entitlements and obligations remain the same as they were immediately prior to the date hereof.


GRIFFON CORPORATION




By:  /s/ Seth L. Kaplan
Seth L. Kaplan
Senior Vice President                




Acknowledged and Agreed:




/s/ Harvey R. Blau
Harvey R. Blau
Dated: February 5, 2015
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D17-3082

_____________________________

TAVARES SPELLMAN-FOLMAR,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County.

John L. Miller, Judge.

May 25, 2018

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant’s convictions and sentences, but remand 

for correction of a scrivener’s error in the written judgment. 

Appellant pleaded guilty to all five counts charged in the 

information, and the trial court orally adjudicated him guilty of 

all five counts. Count five was included on the fourth page of the 

written judgment, but omitted from the first page. On remand, 

the lower tribunal shall enter a corrected written judgment that 

conforms to the court’s oral pronouncement of guilt on all five 

counts. See King v. State, 201 So. 3d 206 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) 

(affirming an Anders appeal but remanding for correction of 

scrivener’s errors in the written judgment); Washington v. State,

37 So. 3d 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (same).
2

AFFIRMED and REMANDED with instructions.

WOLF, BILBREY, and KELSEY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Steven L. Seliger, Assistant 

Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
§ 1240.52 Simple risk-weight approach (SRWA). ( a ) *General.* Under the SRWA, an Enterprise's total risk-weighted assets for equity exposures equals the sum of the risk-weighted asset amounts for each of the Enterprise's individual equity exposures as determined under this section.
( b ) *SRWA computation for individual equity exposures.* An Enterprise must determine the risk-weighted asset amount for an individual equity exposure by multiplying the adjusted carrying value of the equity exposure by the lowest applicable risk weight in this section. ( 1 ) *Community development equity exposures.* A 100 percent risk weight is assigned to an equity exposure that was acquired with the prior written approval of FHFA and is designed primarily to promote community welfare, including the welfare of low- and moderate-income communities or families, such as by providing services or employment, and excluding equity exposures to an unconsolidated small business investment company and equity exposures held through a small business investment company described in section 302 of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 (15 U.S.C. 682).
( 2 ) *Other equity exposures.* A 400 percent risk weight is assigned to an equity exposure to an operating company or an investment in a separate account.
#### § 1083.1 Adjustment of civil penalty amounts.

(a) The maximum amount of each civil penalty within the jurisdiction of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to impose is adjusted in accordance with the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990, as amended by the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996 and further amended by the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015 ([28 U.S.C. 2461 note](https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/28/2461)), as follows:

Table 1 to Paragraph (a)

| Law | Penalty description | Adjusted maximum civil penalty amount |
| --- | --- | --- |
| [12 U.S.C. 5565(c)(2)(A)](https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/12/5565) | Tier 1 penalty | $7,034 |
| [12 U.S.C. 5565(c)(2)(B)](https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/12/5565) | Tier 2 penalty | 35,169 |
| [12 U.S.C. 5565(c)(2)(C)](https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/12/5565) | Tier 3 penalty | 1,406,728 |
| [15 U.S.C. 1717a(a)(2)](https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/15/1717a) | Per violation | 2,451 |
| [15 U.S.C. 1717a(a)(2)](https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/15/1717a) | Annual cap | 2,449,575 |
| [12 U.S.C. 2609(d)(1)](https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/12/2609) | Per failure | 115 |
| [12 U.S.C. 2609(d)(1)](https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/12/2609) | Annual cap | 230,464 |
| [12 U.S.C. 2609(d)(2)(A)](https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/12/2609) | Per failure, where intentional | 230 |
| [12 U.S.C. 5113(d)(2)](https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/12/5113) | Per violation | 35,516 |
| [15 U.S.C. 1639e(k)(1)](https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/15/1639e) | First violation | 14,069 |
| [15 U.S.C. 1639e(k)(2)](https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/15/1639e) | Subsequent violations | 28,135 |

(b) The adjustments in [paragraph (a)](/on/2024-09-19/title-12/section-1083.1#p-1083.1(a)) of this section shall apply to civil penalties assessed after January 15, 2024, whose associated violations occurred on or after November 2, 2015.

[[89 FR 1789](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/89-FR-1789), Jan. 11, 2024]
### NUMBER 13

- 20

- 0011 4

- CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

- EDINBURG

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellant,

v.

MYRA ALEJANDRA LUNA

, Appellee.

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3

of Cameron County, Texas.



## ORDER

Before Justices Benavides, Hinojosa, and Tijerina

Order Per Curiam

Appellant, the State of Texas, by and through the District Attorney in and for

Cameron County, Texas, has filed a motion for stay of proceedings in the above cause.

On February 10 , 20 20 , the trial court g ranted a motion to suppress evidence. T he State

has filed a notice of appeal and has requested a stay in the trial court ’ s proceedings

pending disposition of its appeal. See T EX

. C ODE C RIM

. P ROC

. A NN

. § 44.01( a )(5), (e)2 The Court, having examined and fully considered the motion for stay of proceedings, is

of the opinion that said motion should be granted. The motion for stay is hereby

GRANTED, and the trial court's proceedings are hereby ordered STAYED pending

disposition of the State ’ s appeal.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the

3rd day of March 2020.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****C�mo pagar su educaci�n[electronic resource].**
 
SuDoc Number: ED1.2:F 96/3/ | ED 1.310/2: | ED 1.45/7:

Item Number:0461-B-19 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000876345
 
2004-05| 2005-06
 
April 6, 2020
#### §§ 1293.28-1293.30 [Reserved]
"

"

"

"

" "

"

"

"

"

"

?>

?>

?>

?>UT ?>UT

?> ?>

?> ?>

?>

?> ?> ?>

?> ?>?> ?>

U?>T ?>

?> ?> ?> ?>

"K

"K

"K

"K

"K "K "K "K

"K "K

"K "K "K

"K "K "K

!

! !

!

* * **

*** * ** * * *

*

*

*

*

*

*

* *

*

*

*

* *

*

*

** * *

*

*

*

* * * * *

*

** *

* * * *** * * * * * ** * * * *

* * *

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

* **

* * * * *

* *

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

**

* * ** * * * *

* * * *** *

*

* * * * *

**

*

*

*

*

* *

*

*

*

* *

* *

*

* *

*

* *** * *

*

* ** *

*

*

*

"K

"K

"K

"K

?>?>

"K

T01N T01N

R03E

R03E

R04E

R04E

7

8 9 11

33

20

36 32

29

35

27 25

24

12

30 26

22

34

17

31

14

19

16

21 23

28

13 18

6Ð231.1

6Ð429

6Ð331

6Ð188

6Ð241

6Ð242

6Ð182

Ð6

FH 17

6Ð245

6Ð530

6Ð427

6Ð181

6Ð187

6Ð443

Ð6

331.1A

187.2D

Ð6

182.1C

187.2L

Ð6

182.1B

Ð6

241.1A

Ð6

443.1B

Ð6

241.1C

Ð6

182.1A

6Ð188

Ð6

231.1A

6Ð182.1L

Ð6

331.1B

187.2E

6Ð443

6Ð241

182.1H

187.2C

187.2G

427.1B

Ð6

241.1B

182.1E

Ð6

443.1A

182.1F

Ð6

182.1M

182.1D

01

245.1F

187.2N

245

1

24

6Ð429

187.2O

6Ð429

24

187.2F

6Ð331

6Ð231.1

187.2P

6Ð182

188.1F

6Ð231.1

Ð6

FH 17

6Ð442

6Ð181

181

181

Mystic

Pasture

Whitetail

Pasture

Hay Draw

Slate School Pasture

Pasture

West

School

Pasture

45 25

57

40

04

63

05

23

24

34

64

06

47 17

27

07 14

15

50

51

58

16

09

38 56 36

18

12

02

44 13

66

48

11

10

621022

621062

Slate

School Pasture

70

68 26

67

621065

MYSTIC RANGE PROJECT

Slate Prairie Range Allotment

±

Range Improvements

?> Pond/Reservoir

UT Water Tank

"K Spring Head Works

* * * Fence

! ! ! ! ! Pipeline

" Cattleguard

Other Symbols

Allotment Boundary

Pasture Boundary

Private Land

Management Areas

5.1 Resource Production Emphasis

5.4 Big Game Winter Range Emphasis

03/19/2010

Proposed Alt C Improvements

"K Proposed Spring Improvement

?> Proposed Pond Improvement

* * * Proposed Fence

0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5 2

Miles
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 2052** 

THANH TAN NGUYEN ,
P laintiff

- Appell ant ,

v.
PATRICK R. DONAHOE, Postmaster General, USPS , Defendant

- Appell ee .

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Greenbelt

. Alexander Williams, Jr. , District Judge. ( 8 :1 3

- c v - 00800

- AW )

Submitted : December 17, 2013 Decided: December 19, 2013

Before KING, GREGORY, and WYNN , Circuit Judges.

Dismiss ed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Thanh Tan Nguyen , Appellant Pro Se

. Allen F. Loucks, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CUR IAM: Thanh Tan Nguyen appeals the district court’s order
dismissing his employment discrimination action for lack of
jurisdiction under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1). We have reviewed
the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny
leave to pro ceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal for
the reasons stated by the district court. Nguyen v. Donahoe ,
No. 8:13

- cv
- 00800

- AW (D. Md. July 12 , 2013). 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.

DISMISS ED