alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 2704.205 Documentation of fees and expenses.

The application shall be accompanied by full documentation of the fees and expenses, including the cost of any study, analysis, engineering report, test, project or similar matter, for which an award is sought. A separate itemized statement shall be submitted for each professional firm or individual whose services are covered by the application, showing the hours spent in connection with the underlying proceeding by each individual, a description of the specific services performed, the rate at which each fee has been computed, any expenses for which reimbursement is sought, the total amount claimed, and the total amount paid or payable by the applicant or by any other person or entity for the services provided. The administrative law judge may require the applicant to provide vouchers, receipts, or other substantiation for any expenses claimed.
Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic 

and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of 

any formal errors so that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go 

to press. 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS

No. 18-BG-1131

IN RE KAREN H. ROSS

2018 DDN 285

A Member of the Bar of the

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Bar Reg. No. 499517

BEFORE: Easterly, Associate Judge, and Washington and Nebeker, Senior Judges. 

O R D E R

(FILED – January 17, 2019)

On consideration of the certified order of the Supreme Court of Nevada

suspending respondent from the practice of law in that jurisdiction for three years, 

all but six months stayed in favor of probation with conditions for a period of two 

years and six months; this court’s October 29, 2018, order directing respondent to 

show cause why reciprocal discipline should not be imposed; and the statement of 

Disciplinary Counsel; and it appearing that respondent failed to file a response to the 

court’s show cause order but did file her D.C. Bar R. XI, §14 (g) affidavit on

November 28, 2018, it is

ORDERED that Karen H. Ross is hereby suspended from the practice of law 

in this jurisdiction for a period of three years nunc pro tunc to November 28, 2018. 

The suspension is stayed all but the first six months in favor of a two-year, six-month 

period of probation subject to the conditions imposed by the state of Nevada. See In 

re Sibley, 990 A.2d 483 (D.C. 2010); In re Fuller, 930 A.2d 194, 198 (D.C. 2007) 

(rebuttable presumption of identical reciprocal discipline applies to all cases in 

which the respondent does not participate).

PER CURIAM
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
CARDIA, INC.
FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE
JANUARY 1, 2000 TO JUNE 30, 2000
</LEGEND>

<S>                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                        6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                  JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                    JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                              334,400
<SECURITIES>                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       224,188
<ALLOWANCES>                                              0
<INVENTORY>                                         131,484
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    706,603
<PP&E>                                              138,864
<DEPRECIATION>                                      (25,216)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      878,583
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                86,411
<BONDS>                                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                             12,026
<OTHER-SE>                                        2,885,101
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        878,583
<SALES>                                             696,338
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    696,338
<CGS>                                              (123,191)
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    (1,112,367)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    9,997
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    (406,032)
<INCOME-TAX>                                              0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                (406,032)
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                       (406,032)
<EPS-BASIC>                                           (0.34)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         (0.34)



</TABLE>
#### § 401.17 Act.

*Act* means the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959.
APPENDIX D

May 30, 2007 letter to the US EPA Region 9 Administrator
ALLEN BIAGGI 

Director I 

State of Nevada 

Department of Conservation and Natural Resources a )ffice of the Director 

Wchard H. Bryan Building 

901 S. Stewart Street, Suite 5001 

Carson City, Nevada 89701 

Telephone (775) 684-2700 

Facsimile (775) 684-27 15 

JIM GIBBONS 

Governor 

KAY SCHERER 

Deputy Director 

Division of Conservation Districts 

Division of Environmental Protection 

Division of Forestry 

Division of State Lands 

Division of State Parks 

Division of Water Resources 

Natural Heritage Program 

WiId Horse Program 

www .dcnr .nv.gov 

STATE OF NEVADA 

Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 

OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR 

May 30,2007 

Wayne Nastri 

Regional Administrator 

ORA- 1, USEPA Region 9 

75 Hawthorne Street 

San Francisco CA 94105 

Dear Mr. Nastri: 

Nevada Revised Statutes 445B.205 designates the Department of Conservation and Natural 

Resources (Department) as the air pollution control agency for the %fate of Nevada for the 

purposes of the Clean Air kct insofar as it pertains to State programs. Within the Department, 

the Division of Environmental Protection has responsibility to manage the air quality planning 

and air pollution control programs for the State of Nevada. Therefore, pursuant to Nevada 

Administrative Code 445B.053, I am hereby assigning the Administrator of the Nevada Division 

of Environmental Protection, or the Deputy Administrator acting on his behalf, to be my official 

designee for the purposes of the Clean Air Act, including, but not limited to, adoption, revision 

and submittal of state plans and state implementation plans. 

Sincerely, 

Allen Biaggi 

Director 

cc Michael Dayton, Chief of Staff, Office of the Governor 

Jodi Stephens, Deputy Chief of Staff, Office of the Governor 

Leo Drozdoff, Administrator, NDEP 

Colleen Cripps, Deputy Administrator, NDEP 

Tom Porta, Deputy Administrator, NDEP 

Deborah Jordan, Director, EPA Air Division, Region IX 

Jefferson Wehling, ORC, EPA Region IX 

I (NSPO Rev. 1-07) (0) 1451
EXHIBIT 31.1
 
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO
 SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002
 (18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350)
 
 I,Scott Gallagher, certify that:
 
 1. I have reviewed this annual report ofFTS Group, Inc.;
 
 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 theregistrantas of, and for, the periods presented
in this report;
 
 4. As theregistrant’scertifying officer,Iamresponsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e))and internal control over financial
reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the
registrant and have:
 
 (a) Designed such disclosure controls
and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed
undermysupervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known tomeby 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 reportmyconclusions 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.As theregistrant’scertifying officer,I have disclosed, based onmymost recent evaluation of internal
control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of
theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):
 
 (a) All significant deficiencies and
material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over
financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’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 theregistrant’s internal control over financial
reporting.
 
 
 Dated:
      April 15, 2008/s/
      Scott GallagherScott
      Gallagher
                Chief
      Executive Officer, Interim Chief Financial Officer and Principal
      Accounting Officer
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 09**  **- 7468** 

IAN AULDEN CAMPBELL , Petitioner

- Appellant ,
v. ROY A. COOPER, III; FREDERICK HUBBARD , Respondents

- Appellees
.

Appeal from the United States District Cour t for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh
. Terrence W. Boyle , District Judge. ( 5:07

- hc

- 02201

- BO )

Submitted : February 23, 2010 Decided: March 4 , 2010

Before WILKINSON, KING, and DAVIS , Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion
. Ann Bach Petersen, GLOVER & PETERSEN, PA, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, for Appellant. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in th is circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Ian Aulden Campbell seeks to appeal the district
court ’ s order s denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition , and denying reconsideration of that order under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) . The order s are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.
See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006) . A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “ a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. ” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006) . A p risoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise de batable. See Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683

- 84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Campbell has not made the requisi te showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decis ional process.

DISMISSE D
§ 4231.13 Plan information for financial assistance merger. A request for a financial assistance merger must include the following information for each plan involved in the merger: ( a ) The most recent trust agreement, including all amendments adopted since the last restatement.
( b ) The most recent plan document, including all amendments adopted since the last restatement.
( c ) The most recent summary plan description (SPD), and all summaries of material modification issued since the most recent SPD.
( d ) If applicable, the most recent rehabilitation plan (or funding improvement plan), including all subsequent amendments and updates, and the percentage of total contributions received under each schedule of the rehabilitation plan (or funding improvement plan) for the most recent plan year available.
( e ) A copy of the plan's most recent IRS determination letter.
( f ) A copy of the plan's most recent Form 5500 (Annual Report Form) and all schedules and attachments (including the audited financial statement).
( g ) A current listing of employers who have an obligation to contribute to the plan, and the approximate number of participants for whom each employer is currently making contributions.
( h ) A schedule of withdrawal liability payments collected in each of the most recent five plan years.
( i ) If applicable, a copy of the plan sponsor's application for suspension of benefits under section 305(e)(9)(G) of ERISA (including all attachments and exhibits).
#### THE NORTHWESTERN BANDS OF SHOSHONE INDIANS, PETITIONERS v. THE UNITED STATES

[No. M-107]

[95 C. Cls. 642; 100 C. Cls. 455; 324 U. S. 335]

The judgment of the Court of Claims was *affirmed*by the* Supreme Court on March 12, 1945,

Mr. Justice Reed

delivering the opinion.

The syllabus of the Supreme Court’s decision, 324 U. S„. 335, is as follows:

1. The treaty of July 30, 1863 with the Northwestern. Bands of the Shoshone Indians was not a recognition or acknowledgment by the United States of the Indian title to the lands therein mentioned; therefore a claim to compensation for the taking of the lands is not one “arising under or growing out of” the treaty, within the1 meaning of the special jurisdictional Act of February 28, 1929, and no recovery upon such claim can be had under that Act.

*796(a) The finding of the Court of Claims that the United States did not by the treaty intend to recognize or acknowledge Indian title to the lands, which finding was the basis of that court’s decision, places the burden on petitioners to overthrow the judgment of the Court of Claims.

(b) Recognition of the Indian title is not to be implied from the grant by the Indians of permission for travel or mining and for the maintenance of communication and transportation facilities.

(c) That Indian title was recognized by the Fort Laramie treaty does not require the conclusion that Indian title was recognized by the treaty of July 30, 1863.

(d) Use in the treaty of the word “claim” or the phrase “country claimed,” though designating the area over which the Indians asserted Indian title, did not constitute acknowledgment by the United States of such title.

(e) The Senate amendment to the treaty — “Nothing herein contained shall be construed or taken to admit any other or greater title or interest in the lands embraced within the territories described in said treaty in said tribes or bands of Indians than existed in them upon the acquisition of said territories from Mexico by the laws thereof” — was not intended to give recognition to Indian titles but only to avoid further complications in the Mexican Cession title situation.

2. Indian treaties are to be construed according to their tenor; and their terms are not to be varied by construction in order to avoid alleged injustices.

Mr. Justice Roberts was of the opinion that the judgment <©f the Court of Claims should be reversed.

Mr. Justice Jackson filed a separate opinion, in which Mr. .Justice Black joined, concurring in the opinion by Mr. Justice .Reed.

Mr. Justice Douglas filed a dissenting opinion in which Mr. Justice Frankfurter and Mr. Justice Murphy joined.

Mr. Justice Murphy filed a dissenting opinion in which .Mr. Justice Frankfurter and Mr. Justice Douglas concurred.
| (1)   | the              Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Trans Max Technologies, Inc. for              the              quarter ended June 30, 2006 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the              quarter ended June 30, 2006, fairly presents in all material respects,              the              financial condition and results of operations of Trans Max Technologies,              Inc.. |
|-----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   By: |   /s/ Samuel                Higgins                                          |
|-----------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  Name:     |  Samuel                Higgins                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      |
|  Title:    |  Principal                Executive Officer,Principal                Financial Officer and Director                                                                                                                                                                                                 |
|  Date:     |  August                18, 2006                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     |
POWER OF ATTORNEY

     KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned Director and/or
officer of Kinark Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), hereby
constitutes and appoints Paul R. Chastain the true and lawful agent and
attorney-in-fact of the undersigned with full power of substitution and
authority to sign for the undersigned, as Director or an officer of the
Company, or as both, the Company's Form 10-K Annual Report for the period
ended December 31, 1999, and any and all exhibits and amendments thereto to be
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Washington, D.C. pursuant
to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; hereby
ratifying and confirming all acts taken by such agent and attorney-in-fact as
herein authorized.

Dated: March 29, 2000                   /s/ Mark E. Walaker
                                        Mark E. Walker
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATION





I, Richard R. Walters, certify that:



1.

I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Little Squaw Gold Mining Company;

2.

Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual report.

3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual 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 annual 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 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 annual report is being prepared;

b)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this annual 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 (fourth 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 directors:

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.



Date:  March 28, 2005



By   /s/ Richard R. Walters



Richard R. Walters, President



A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant to be furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.