alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 121 (Thursday, June 22, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 38851]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-15767]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[CA-610-1430-ET; CARI 02685]


Opening of Land; California

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Public Land Order number 5043 expired on April 19, 1981. 
However, the lands, withdrawn by that order, were never opened pursuant 
to 43 CFR 2091.6.

EFFECTIVE DATES: June 22, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Duane Marti, BLM California State 
Office, 2800 Cottage Way, Suite W-1834, Sacramento, California 95825-
1886, 916-978-4675.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    1. Public Land Order number 5043, as revoked in part by Public Land 
Order number 5656, withdrew approximately 6,757 acres from all forms of 
appropriation under the public land laws, including the mining laws. 
Public Land Order number 5043 terminated on April 19, 1981, under its 
own terms. Under the authority of the Federal Land Policy and 
Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701), the following lands are hereby 
opened to the operation of the public land laws, including the mining 
laws, subject to valid existing rights, the provisions of existing 
withdrawals, other segregations of record, and the requirements of 
applicable laws:

(a). San Bernardino Meridian

T. 11 S., R. 11 E.,
    Secs. 2, 4, 10, 12, and 14;
    Sec. 16, NE\1/4\, E\1/2\NW\1/4\, N\1/2\SE\1/4\, and SE\1/4\SE\1/
4\;
    Secs. 22, 24, and 26.

    The areas described aggregate approximately 5,477 acres of 
federally owned lands.

(b). San Bernardino Meridian

T. 11 S., R. 11 E.,
    Secs. 23 and 25.

    The areas described aggregate approximately 1,280 acres of non-
federally owned lands.

    2. The lands described above in paragraph 1(a) are federally owned 
lands that are withdrawn from both surface entry and mining by two 
overlapping withdrawals and those lands will not be opened to either 
surface entry or mining. Consequently, the opening, insofar as it 
affects those lands, is a record clearing action only.
    3. The lands described above in paragraph 1(b) are non-federally 
owned lands that were conveyed out of public ownership on August 11, 
1919 by a railroad patent. Consequently, the opening, insofar as it 
affects those lands, is a record clearing action only.

    Dated: June 15, 2000.
David McIlnay,
Chief, Branch of Lands.
[FR Doc. 00-15767 Filed 6-21-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-40-P
Exhibit






Exhibit 10.26


IHS MARKIT LTD.


AMENDMENT TO THE 
MARKIT LTD. 2014 EQUITY INCENTIVE AWARD PLAN




Amendment dated as of October 17, 2016 (this “Amendment”) to the Markit Ltd. 2014 Equity Incentive Award Plan (the “2014 Equity Plan”).


W I T N E S S E T H


WHEREAS, Markit Ltd., the predecessor company to IHS Markit Ltd. (the “Company”), entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of March 20, 2016 (the “Merger Agreement”), with Marvel Merger Sub, Inc. and IHS Inc.; and


WHEREAS, following the consummation of the transactions that were contemplated by the Merger Agreement, the Company desires to amend certain terms and conditions related to equity awards granted pursuant to the 2014 Equity Plan.


NOW THEREFORE, the 2014 Equity Plan is hereby amended as follows:


1.AMENDMENT


Section 13.16 of the 2014 Equity Plan, is hereby amended and restated as follows:
 
“13.16 Special Vesting Terms.    
Notwithstanding any other provision of the Plan or any Award Agreement (subject to any provisions applicable to a Holder under an Award Agreement or individual agreement that contain vesting terms that are more favorable to the Holder than those set forth in this Appendix A), if a Holder experiences a Termination of Employment as a result of a termination by the Company without “cause” (as defined in the Markit Key Employee Incentive Program) within 24 months after the Closing Date (as defined in the Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of March 20, 2016, among the Company, Marvel Merger Sub, Inc. and IHS Inc. (the “Merger Agreement”)), and such Termination of Employment is a direct result of the consummation of the Merger (as defined in the Merger Agreement), as determined in the sole discretion of the Company, then all Awards held by such Holder that were unvested as the Closing Date shall vest in full immediately on the date of such Termination of Employment and any Options held by such Holder as of the Closing Date shall remain exercisable until the earlier of (i) 12 months following the date such Termination of Employment or (ii) the expiration of the original stated term for such Option set forth in the applicable Award Agreement.”


		
	2.
	EFFECTIVENESS OF AMENDMENT




This Amendment will become effective immediately.  Except as amended by the terms of this Amendment, the 2014 Equity Plan will remain in full force and effect in accordance with its terms.




1
Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION OF CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
March 31, 2009, (the Report) of Allied Capital Corporation (the Registrant),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof; I, William L.
Walton, the Chairman of the Board of the Registrant, certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant. /s/ William L. WaltonName:
    William L. WaltonDate: May 11, 2009
AMENDMENT TO
        AMERICAN GENERAL CORPORATION
        1997 STOCK AND INCENTIVE PLAN
        AS AMENDED AND RESTATED AS OF
             FEBRUARY 1, 1998


     WHEREAS, AMERICAN GENERAL CORPORATION,
its shareholders and certain affiliates have
heretofore adopted the above-captioned stock
and incentive plan (as amended to date on
January 20, 1999, the "Plan") for the
benefit of certain eligible individuals; and

     WHEREAS, Section 12 of the Plan allows
AMERICAN GENERAL CORPORATION to amend the
Plan (subject to the limitations expressed
therein);

  NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan shall be amended
effective as of November 2, 2000, as
follows:

     1.   The following new paragraph shall be
          added to Section 4:

               "(d) Special Committee.
          Notwithstanding the foregoing, the
          Board may select and appoint a
          special Committee comprised of one
          or more directors, which directors
          need not meet the qualifications
          set forth in Section 4(a), for
          issuance of Awards under the Plan
          to Employees of the Company;
          provided that the authority of
          such special Committee shall
          exclude awards to individuals who
          are either reporting persons for
          purposes of Section 16 of the
          Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or
          "covered employees" (or Employees
          designated as potential "covered
          employees") under Section 162(m)
          of the Code. Such special
          Committee shall have the powers of
          the Committee set forth in Section
          4 for the limited purpose set
          forth in the preceding sentence."

          2.   As amended hereby, the Plan
          is specifically ratified and
          reaffirmed.

     EXECUTED by the undersigned officer as
of November 2, 2000.


               AMERICAN GENERAL CORPORATION


               By:  /S/ GARY D. REDDICK
               Name:  	Gary D. Reddick
               Title:   Executive Vice
				President and
                    	Chief Administrative
				Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                      5
<LEGEND>
                               FDS - 2ND QUARTER
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                          0000006207
<NAME>                         AMREP CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER>                      1,000
<CURRENCY>                     U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              APR-30-2001
<PERIOD-START>                 MAY-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                   OCT-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                       1
<CASH>                           11,825
<SECURITIES>                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                    49,303
<ALLOWANCES>                          0
<INVENTORY>                      75,441
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                      0
<PP&E>                           32,246
<DEPRECIATION>                   14,870
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  170,070
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                 0
<BONDS>                          36,941
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                 0
<PREFERRED>                           0
<COMMON>                            740
<OTHER-SE>                       87,096
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    170,070
<SALES>                           8,603
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                 35,601
<CGS>                             5,894
<TOTAL-COSTS>                    27,726
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                      0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                1,621
<INCOME-PRETAX>                     568
<INCOME-TAX>                        227
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                 341
<DISCONTINUED>                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                       0
<CHANGES>                             0
<NET-INCOME>                        341
<EPS-BASIC>                         .05
<EPS-DILUTED>                       .05



</TABLE>
#### § 301-10.140 May I use a foreign air carrier if the service is preferred by or more convenient for my agency or me?

No. You must use U.S. flag air carrier service, unless you meet one of the exceptions in § 301-10.135, § 301-10.136, or § 301-10.137 or unless foreign air carrier service is deemed a matter of necessity under § 301-10.138.
**Exhibit (32)**Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002In connection with this quarterly report of American Greetings Corporation on Form 10-Q as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date therein specified (the “Report”), each ofthe undersigned certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 ofthe 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 SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and 2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of American Greetings Corporation.January 2, 2008/s/ ZevWeiss
No. 11-9303.

#### Rashid *v.*United States.

C. A. 3d Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
| Exhibit 32.1
 
			CERTIFICATIONS
 
 
Harry Kletter and			Alan L. Schroering, being the Chief Executive Officer and Chief			Financial Officer, respectively, of Industrial Services of America,			Inc., hereby certify as of this 7th day of May, 2007, that the Form			10-Q for the Quarter ended March 31, 2007, fully complies with the			requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange			Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Form 10-Q			fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition			and results of operations of Industrial Services of America, Inc.
 
 
 
 /s/ Harry Kletter                                             
 
Harry Kletter, Chief Executive Officer
 
 
 
 
 /s/ Alan L. Schroering                                      
 
Alan L. Schroering, Chief Financial Officer
  |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12** 
**- 2135** 

AMIDA SANNIE ,
Petitioner ,

v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General , Respondent

.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

.

Submitted : January 30, 2013 Decided: February 1, 2013

Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN , Circuit Judges.

Petition deni ed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Amida Sannie, Petitioner Pro Se. Andrea Gevas, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Office of Immigration Litigation , Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Amida Sannie, a native and citizen of Ghana, petitions
for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals
(Board) dismissing her appeal from a decision of the Immig ration
Judge finding her ineligible for a good faith waiver under 8

U.S.C. § 1186a(c)(4)(C) (2006). We have reviewed Sannie’s

claims and the administrative record , and find no error.

A ccordingly , we deny the petition for review for the reasons
stated by the Board

. See In re: Sannie (B.I.A. Aug. 20, 2012).
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
this court and argumen t would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENI ED
No. 10-10740.

#### Peterka *v.*Tucker, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections.

Sup. Ct. Fla. Certiorari denied.
#### § 301-70.706 For what purposes may an employee use the Government contractor-issued travel charge card while on official travel?

An employee is required to use the Government contractor-issued travel charge card for expenses directly related to official travel.

[FTR Amdt. 2010-02, 75 FR 24436, May 5, 2010]
Order entered May 16, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05
- 12
- 01491
- CV GARY C. EVANS, Appellant
V. THE FROST NATIONAL B ANK, Appellee On Appeal from the 162nd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 09
- 15818 

### O RDER The Court has before it appellant’s May 14, 2013 unopposed motion for extension of time to file his brief. The Court GRANTS the motion and ORDERS appellant to file his brief by May 29, 2013. No further extensions will be grant ed absent a showing of exceptional circumstances.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE
Exhibit 12


              AMERICAN GENERAL CORPORATION
     Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges and
          Ratio of Earnings to Combined Fixed Charges
                 and Preferred Stock Dividends
                          (Unaudited)
                        ($ in millions)


                                                      Three Months Ended
                                                           March 31,
                                                        2001      2000
Consolidated operations:
  Income before income tax expense and net dividends
    on preferred securities of subsidiaries .......... $ 528     $ 478
  Fixed charges deducted from income
    Interest expense .................................   229       217
    Implicit interest in rents .......................     6         6

      Total fixed charges deducted from income .......   235       223

        Earnings available for fixed charges.......... $ 763     $ 701

  Fixed charges per above ............................ $ 235     $ 223
  Dividends on preferred stock and securities ........    43        41

    Combined fixed charges and preferred
      stock dividends ................................ $ 278     $ 264

      Ratio of earnings to fixed charges ..........     3.24      3.14

      Ratio of earnings to combined fixed charges
             and preferred stock dividends ...........  2.74      2.66

Consolidated operations, corporate fixed charges
  and preferred stock dividends only:
    Income before income tax expense and net dividends
      on preferred securities of subsidiaries ........ $ 528     $ 478
    Corporate fixed charges deducted from income -
      corporate interest expense .....................    64        61

        Earnings available for fixed charges ......... $ 592     $ 539

    Corporate fixed charges per above ................ $  64     $  61
    Dividends on preferred stock and securities ......    43        41

      Combined corporate fixed charges and
        preferred stock dividends .................... $ 107     $ 102

           Ratio of earnings to corporate fixed
             charges .................................  9.27      8.80

           Ratio of earnings to combined corporate
             fixed charges and preferred
             stock dividends .........................  5.54      5.29


                                                      Three Months Ended
                                                           March 31,
                                                        2001      2000
American General Finance, Inc.:
  Income before income tax expense ................    $ 104     $  94
  Fixed charges deducted from income
    Interest expense ..............................      172       163
    Implicit interest in rents ....................        4         4

      Total fixed charges deducted from income.....      176       167

        Earnings available for fixed charges ......    $ 280     $ 261

            Ratio of earnings to fixed charges ....     1.59      1.56
#### § 109-1.5108-3 Stores inventories.

Perpetual inventory records are to be maintained for stores inventory items.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5458 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5458

    To authorize investor-owned electric utilities in California to 
      purchase electric power directly from the Bonneville Power 
       Administration at specified rates, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 12, 2000

 Mr. Bilbray introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                         Committee on Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To authorize investor-owned electric utilities in California to 
      purchase electric power directly from the Bonneville Power 
       Administration at specified rates, 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. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Electricity Consumer Relief Act of 
2000''.

SEC. 2. PURCHASE OF ELECTRIC POWER FROM BPA.

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission shall issue such orders as 
may be necessary to permit investor-owed electric utilities selling 
electric power at retail in the State of California that have divested 
their generation capacity assets, as mandated by the State of 
California, to purchase electric power directly from the Bonneville 
Power Administration at the average rates that wholesale electric power 
was sold by the Bonneville Power Administration to purchasers in the 
State of California during June, July, and August of 1999. Such orders 
shall remain in effect until December 31, 2002.
                                 <all>
```
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Wilton NUNEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 03-11141.

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

May 25, 2004.

Renee E. Harris, US Attorney’s Office, Fort Worth, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Steven Jay Rozan, Kuniansky & Rozan, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before SMITH, DUHÉ, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

*545PER CURIAM.1

Wilton Nunez appeals the denial of his motion to suppress following his guilty-plea conviction for possession with intent to distribute more than 5 kilograms of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A). Nunez argues that the officer who conducted the search exceeded the scope of the traffic stop by requesting permission to search the truck after completing his physical inspection of the truck’s exterior.

The officer testified that the driver of the truck exhibited a nervousness unusual in truck drivers. He further testified that Nunez, who was the co-driver, appeared immediately from the sleeping compartment unclothed as he began speaking with the driver, when co-drivers ordinarily ignore routine traffic stops, and then re-appeared fully dressed a short time later. The officer observed that the truck’s logbooks showed an extended break in service and then a four-day delay in Nogales, Arizona, before taking on a load of produce bound for New York. The driver and Nunez were both from Florida, and the officer found it odd that there was a delay in receiving a load that did not take them back home. The officer explained that in his experience produce was loaded 24 hours per day, and similar trucks that he had inspected had spent no more than one day receiving their loads in Arizona. We conclude from the totality of the circumstances, viewed in the light most favorable to the Government, that the officer was justified in continuing the detention to ask for consent to search the truck. *See United States v. Arvizu,*534 U.S. 266, 273, 122 S.Ct. 744, 151 L.Ed.2d 740 (2002); *United States v. Gonzalez,*328 F.3d 755, 758 (5th Cir.2003); *United States v. Fort,*248 F.3d 475, 479-83 (5th Cir.2001).

We note that Nunez has not contested the validity of the consent to search, which was given by the driver. He argues that the driver did not have authority to bind him. This argument is unavailing because a person who has joint control over a vehicle may give valid consent to its search. *See United States v. Crain,*33 F.3d 480, 484 (5th Cir.1994).

AFFIRMED.

1

. Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Case 1:22-cv-23074-BB Document 211-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/19/2023 Page 1 of 1