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

100 100

100

100

P R IN C E C O V E R D

H A W K E S A V E

H A R R IS P O IN T R D

M C K IN L E Y S T

B A R R O N

R D

EASTPORT - DEER ISLAND

¬«190

MAINE

MAINE

MAINE

U

NITED

STATES

CANADA

UNITED STATES

CANADA

WESTERN PASSAGE

COBSCOOK BAY

Eastport Eastport

Post Office

The Seaview

Campground

Eastport

Municipal

Pier

Eastport

Fish Pier

Dog

Island

Light

Dudley

Island

Page

Rock

Margie

Rock

Treat

Island

Burial

Island

Dog

Island

Gull

Rock

Clark

Ledge

Buckman

Head

Bayside

Cemetery

Hillside

Cemetery

Todd

Head

Estes

Head

Eastport

Lubec West

Lubec

Robbinston

Eastport

OE E

FEET

FEET

FEET

FEET

30"

00'

67°

44°

30"

00'

E 66°52'30"

30"

55'

57' 57'30"

55'

480 000

1 400

49

49

77

000

49

78

49

49

49

84 N

49

49

80

49

59

79

60

49

79

73

49

49

74

80

83

6 6

81

61 62

49

6 6

6

67

000m 58 E 64 65 66 6 59 6 6 6

1 380 000

000

49

83

49

49

76

75

49

49

66

77

000m

49

6

N

72

6

62

78

6 65

450

63 6

00' 57' 55'

45°

00' 66°

52'30"

45°

67°

44° 52'

57'30" 55' 52'30"

74

75

84

73

82

000m

72

81

49

49

49

76

49

49

49

6 64 6 6 63 000m

60 6 67 6

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

MAINE

ADJOINING 7.5' QUADRANGLES

QUADRANGLE LOCATION

EASTPORT OE E, ME-NB

2011

Interstate Route State Route

ROAD CLASSIFICATION

Ramp 4WD

US Route Local Road

WX Interstate Route /. US Route H State Route

EASTPORT OE E QUADRANGLE

MAINE-NEW BRUNSWICK

7.5-MINUTE SERIES

Imagery..................................................NAIP, August 2009

Roads................................................©2006-2011 TomTom

Names...............................................................GNIS, 2011

Hydrography.................National Hydrography Dataset, 2009

Contours.............................National Elevation Dataset, 1999

Boundaries..............Census, IBWC, IBC, USGS, 1972 - 2010

North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)

World Geodetic System of 1984 (WGS84). Projection and

1 000-meter grid: Universal Transverse Mercator, Zone 19T

Produced by the United States Geological Survey

10 000-foot ticks: Maine Coordinate System of 1983 (east

zone)

This map was produced to conform with the

National Geospatial Program US Topo Product Standard, 2011.

A metadata file associated with this product is draft version 0.6.0

CONTOUR INTERVAL 20 FEET

NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988

SCALE 1:24 000

1 0.5 0

MILES

1

1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000

FEET

1000 500 0 METERS 1000 2000

1 0.5 0 KILOMETERS 1 2

U.S. National Grid

100,000-m Square ID

Grid Zone Designation

FK

19T

×

Ø

MN

GN

UTM GRID AND 2011 MAGNETIC NORTH DECLINATION AT CENTER OF SHEET

1° 27 ́

26 MILS

17° 32 ́

312 MILS
EXHIBIT 32.2

               CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 10 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 Form 10-Q of Environmental Solutions
Worldwide, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period March 31, 2008 (the
"Report"), Praveen Nair Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, hereby certify,
pursuant to 18 U. S. C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1). To my knowledge, the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

                                           DATE: MAY 15, 2008

                                           /S/ PRAVEEN NAIR
                                           --------------------
                                           PRAVEEN NAIR
                                           CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to Environmental Solutions Worldwide,
Inc. and will be retained by Environmental Solutions Worldwide, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4177

AN ACT

To designate the United States Post Office building located

at 1601 Highway 35 in Middletown, New Jersey, as

the ‘‘Candace White Post Office’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

4 The United States Post Office building located at

5 1601 Highway 35 in Middletown, New Jersey, shall be

6 known and designated as the ‘‘Candace White Post

7 Office’’.

8 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

9 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

10 paper, or other record of the United States to the building
2

HR 4177 EH

1 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference

2 to the Candace White Post Office.

Passed the House of Representatives May 23, 1994.

Attest:

Clerk.
3

HR 4177 EH
103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4177

AN ACT

To designate the United States Post Office building

Jersey, as the ‘‘Candace White Post Office’’.located at 1601 Highway 35 in Middletown, New
United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

July 1, 2014

RICHARD A. POSNER, Circuit Judge

 MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge

 ILANA DIAMOND ROVNER, Circuit Judge

No. 14-8003

MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

AU OPTRONICS CORP., et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

Petition for Leave to take an

Interlocutory Appeal from the

United States District Court for

the Northern District of Illinois,

Eastern Division.

No. 09 C 6610

Joan B. Gottschall, Judge.

O R D E R

The panel has decided to rehear this appeal. The panel’s opinion and judgment of 

March 27, 2014, are hereby vacated. By separate order, the court will fix a deadline for 

the filing of supplemental briefs and set a date for oral argument.
#### § 0.484 Amateur radio operator examinations.

Generally, examinations for amateur radio operation licenses shall be administered at locations and times specified by volunteer examiners. (See § 97.509). When the FCC conducts examinations for amateur radio operator licenses, they shall take place at locations and times designated by the FCC.

[58 FR 13021, Mar. 9, 1993]
Exhibit






Exhibit 10.1
 
2017 Executive Officer Annualized Base Salaries
 
The annualized base salaries for Omnicell’s executive officers for 2017 are as follows:
 
	
							
	Name
	 
	Title
	 
	2017 
Annualized 
Base Salary
	 

	Randall A. Lipps
	 
	Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
	 
	$
	660,000
	 

	Peter J. Kuipers
	 
	Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
	 
	$
	375,000
	 

	J. Christopher Drew
	 
	President, North American Automation
	 
	$
	375,000
	 

	Robin G. Seim
	 
	President, Global Automation and Medication Adherence
	 
	$
	375,000
	 

	Nhat Ngo
	 
	Executive Vice President, Strategy and Business Development
	 
	$
	300,000
	 

	Dan S. Johnston
	 
	Executive Vice President and Chief Legal and Administrative Officer
	 
	$
	300,000
	 

	Jorge Taborga
	 
	Executive Vice President, Engineering
	 
	$
	285,000
Abatement Order filed June 3, 2014 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-14-00177-CR

____________

MELVIN EUGENE FLETCHER, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 185th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1376099

ABATEMENT ORDER

Appellant is not represented by counsel on appeal. Appellant has requested 

appointment of counsel. This court is unaware whether appellant is entitled to 

appointment of counsel and to proceed without the payment of costs. Accordingly, 

we enter the following order. 

We ORDER the judge of the 185th District Court to immediately conduct a 

hearing at which appellant and counsel for the State shall be present to determine 
whether appellant desires to prosecute his appeal, and, if so, whether appellant is 

indigent and, thus entitled to appointed counsel and a free record. The judge shall 

appoint appellate counsel for appellant, if necessary. The judge shall see that a 

record of the hearing is made, shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law, 

and shall order the trial clerk to forward a record of the hearing and a supplemental 

clerk’s record containing the findings and conclusions. Those records shall be 

filed with the clerk of this court on or before July 3, 2014.

The appeal is abated, treated as a closed case, and removed from this Court’s 

active docket. The appeal will be reinstated on this Court’s active docket when the 

trial court’s findings and recommendations are filed in this Court. 

PER CURIAM
NO.WR-84,208-01

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS AUSTIN,TEXAS RECEIVED IN COURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALS
JOSE GARZA V. THE STATE OF TEXAS 

## DEC212015
AbelAcosta, Clerk FromAppeal No.l4-12-00925-CR Trial Cause No.l325799-A--~ Harris County

MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE PRO SE

PETITION FOR DISCETIONARY REVIEW 

## FILED(N 

## COURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALS
1 o o --*-> -•-' t. u L ,. 

### AbelAcosta, Clerk
TO THE.HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: Jose Garza Appellant,respectfully requests that the Court grant his moti on to extend time to file his petition for discretionary review. In^support of said motion,Appellant would show unto the Court the following:
I. The Petitioner was convicted in the 177th District Court of Harris Goun-iv tyjTexas of the offense of possession of a controlled substance inCause No. 1325799,Styled State of Texas vs. Jose Garza. The Petitioner appealed to the 

### Court of Appeals,Fourteenth Court Supreme Judicial District. The case affirmed on March 27,2014. II. 

### The present deadline for filing the Petition for Discretionary Review is 

### January 16,2016. The Petitioner has not requested any extension prior to this request.III. On the 16th day of December 2015,Petitioner has submitted a Motion for En Banc Consideration. IV. 

### Appellant is requesting an extension of time so that the Appellant may file apro se Petition for Discretionary Review. An extension of time.is nece= ssary so that the Appelant, who is not an attorney, may familialize himself .1 

### with the rules governing the filing of apetition for discretionary review,adquately research his case,and draft his own PDR. This motion is not made for 

### the purpose of delay. 

### Wherefore,Premises Considered,Appellant prays that this Honorable Court grant this requested extension of time to file the Appellant's Petition for I.i 

### DiscretionaryReview in the above cause and extend the time for filing the pe tition until March 16,2016 (60 days).
Jose Garza Petitijorier,pro se TexasDepartmentofCrimiiBlJustice Hu^iesUnit TDCJ#1813274 (jcitesvLl.lfi,Texas 76597
CERTIFICATE^OF SERVICE 

### I do hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing instrument was this the 

### day served on counsel for the State:by mailing same to the following parties on this the 16th day of December 2016: 

### HarrisCountyDistrictAttorney's Office StateProsecutingAttorney AppellantDivision P.O. Box 12405 1201Franklin,Suite600 Austin,Texas 78711 Hauston,Texas77002 

# _-ja/W/5 Petitkner,prose
103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4253

AN ACT

To require the Secretary of the Interior to convey the

Corning National Fish Hatchery to the State of Arkansas.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Corning National Fish

5 Hatchery Conveyance Act of 1994’’.

6 SEC. 2. CONVEYANCE OF CORNING NATIONAL FISH HATCH7 ERY TO STATE OF ARKANSAS.

8 (a) CONVEYANCE REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary of

9 the Interior shall convey to the State of Arkansas, without

10 reimbursement and by no later than December 31, 1994,

11 all right, title, and interest of the United States in and

12 to the property described in subsection (b), for use by the

13 Arkansas Game and Fish Commission as part of the State

14 of Arkansas fish culture program.

15 (b) PROPERTY DESCRIBED.—The property referred

16 to in subsection (a) is the property known as the Corning

17 National Fish Hatchery (popularly known as the William
2

HR 4253 EH

1 H. Donham State Fish Hatchery), located one mile west

2 of Corning, Arkansas, on Arkansas State Highway 67 in

3 Clay County, Arkansas, consisting of 137.34 acres (more

4 or less), and all improvements and related personal prop5 erty under the control of the Secretary that is located on

6 that property, including buildings, structures, and equip7 ment.

8 (c) REVERSIONARY INTEREST OF UNITED STATES.—

9 All right, title, and interest in property described in sub10 section (b) shall revert to the United States if the property

11 ceases to be used as part of the State of Arkansas fish

12 culture program. The State of Arkansas shall ensure that

13 the property reverting to the United States is in substan14 tially the same or better condition as at the time of trans15 fer.

Passed the House of Representatives July 12, 1994.

Attest:

Clerk.

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4253

AN ACT

To require the Secretary of the Interior to convey

of Arkansas.the Corning National Fish Hatchery to the State
No. 11-14.

#### DiBiasi *v.*Starbucks Corp. et al.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk October 26, 2009

p1019 

# Order

October 26, 2009

139065

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 139065 COA: 278240 Wayne CC: 06-011020-01 KEHINDA WOFFORD, a/k/a KEHINDE TYRU WOFFORD, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 21, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
Exhibit 32.1

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 E-LOAN, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Mark E. Lefanowicz,
as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d), as applicable 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/ Mark E. Lefanowicz Mark E. Lefanowicz
President and Chief Executive Officer

August 9, 2005



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to E-LOAN, Inc. and will be retained by E-LOAN, Inc. and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED NOTE

U.S. $50,000,000	Originally Issued June 24, 1998

Amended and Restated as of April 26, 1999

Further Amended and Restated as of July 28, 1999

FOR VALUE RECEIVED, E-LOAN, INC., a corporation organized and
existing under the laws of Delaware (the "Borrower"), hereby promises to pay to
the order of COOPER RIVER FUNDING INC., a Delaware corporation (the "Lender"),
in lawful money of the United States of America in immediately available funds
on the Expiry Date (as defined in the Warehouse Credit Agreement) the principal
sum of FIFTY MILLION United States Dollars ($50,000,000), or, if less, the
aggregate unpaid principal amount of all Advances (as defined in the Warehouse
Credit Agreement) made by the Lender to the Borrower pursuant to the Warehouse
Credit Agreement.



The Borrower promises also to pay interest on the unpaid
principal amount of each Advance from the date such Advance is made until paid
in full, at the interest rates, and at the times, as specified in the Warehouse
Credit Agreement.



This Note is the Note referred to in the Warehouse Credit
Agreement dated as of June 24, 1998, as amended (as so amended, the "Warehouse
Credit Agreement"), among the Borrower, the Lender and GE Capital Mortgage
Services, Inc., as Agent, and is entitled to the benefits thereof.  This Note is
secured by the Warehouse Security Agreement.



This Note is subject to mandatory prepayment as provided in
Section 4.02 of the Warehouse Credit Agreement and, in case an Event of Default
(as defined in the Warehouse Credit Agreement) shall occur and be continuing,
the principal of and accrued interest on this Note may be declared to be due and
payable in the manner and with the effect provided in the Warehouse Credit
Agreement.



The Borrower hereby waives diligence, presentment,
protest, demand or notice of every kind in connection with this Note.



This Note amends, restates and supersedes an Amended and
restated Note in the principal amount of $25,000,000 payable to the order of the
Lender dated as of April 26, 1999 (the "Restated Note"), which amended, restated
and superseded a Note in the principal amount of $15,000,000 payable to the
order of the Lender dated June 24, 1998 (the "Original Note").  However, without
duplication, this Second Amended and Restated Note shall in no way extinguish
the Borrower's unconditional obligation to repay all indebtedness evidenced by
the Original Note and/or the Restated Note.



THIS NOTE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, WITHOUT REGARD TO PRINCIPLES
OF CONFLICTS OF LAWS.



E-Loan, Inc.



/s/ Steve Majerus

Steven M. Majerus

Vice President Secondary Marketing

---
###### Editorial Note on Part 1

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

#### § 1.718 Unsatisfied informal complaints; formal complaints relating back to the filing dates of informal complaints.

When an informal complaint has not been satisfied pursuant to § 1.717, the complainant may file a formal complaint with this Commission in the form specified in § 1.721. Such filing will be deemed to relate back to the filing date of the informal complaint: *Provided,* That the formal complaint: Is filed within 6 months from the date of the carrier's response, or if no response has been filed, within 6 months of the due date for the response; makes reference to the date of the informal complaint, and is based on the same cause of action as the informal complaint. If no formal complaint is filed within the 6-month period, the informal complaint proceeding will be closed.

[83 FR 44831, Sept. 4, 2018]
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed

November 29 , 2018.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14- 18 -00013- CR

FREDDRICK L. WOODS, Appellant

V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 338th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1534608

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N Appellant Freddrick L. Woods has signed and filed a written request to withdraw his notice of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2. Because this court has not delivered an opinion, we grant appellant’s request. Accordingly, we order the appeal dismissed. We direct the clerk of the court to issue the mandate of the court immediately.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Boyce and Busby Do Not Publish – Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

In Re SWORDS TO PLOWSHARES, NATIONAL 

VETERANS LEGAL SERVICES PROGRAM,

Petitioners

______________________

2024-104

______________________

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the Department 

of Veterans Affairs.

______________________

ON PETITION

______________________

Before LOURIE, PROST, and STOLL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

O R D E R

Petitioners, Swords to Plowshares and the National 

Veterans Legal Services Program, seek a writ of mandamus directing the Department of Veterans Affairs (“DVA”) 

to take final agency action in its ongoing rulemaking proceedings to update and clarify existing regulations regarding eligibility for benefits based on character of discharge. 

The Secretary of Veterans Affairs opposes.

Because the Secretary’s alleged failure to timely issue 

a final rule interferes with our jurisdiction to review the 

rule pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 502, we have authority to 

Case: 24-104 Document: 15 Page: 1 Filed: 02/05/2024
2 IN RE: SWORDS TO PLOWSHARES

review petitioners’ allegations of unreasonable delay under 

the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651. See 5 U.S.C. § 706(1); 

In re A Cmty. Voice, 878 F.3d 779, 783 (9th Cir. 2017); Telecomms. Rsch. & Action Ctr. v. FCC, 750 F.2d 70, 75 (D.C. 

Cir. 1984); In re Paralyzed Veterans of Am., 392 F. App’x 

858, 860 (Fed. Cir. 2010). However, mandamus is “reserved for extraordinary situations,” Gulfstream Aerospace 

Corp. v. Mayacamas Corp., 485 U.S. 271, 289 (1988), 

where, inter alia, the right to issuance of the writ is clear 

and indisputable and issuance of the writ is appropriate 

under the circumstances. Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for D.C., 

542 U.S. 367, 380–81 (2004). 

We are certainly troubled by the amount of time it has 

taken the DVA to conduct these rulemaking proceedings.* 

Nevertheless, the DVA has now submitted final amended 

rules to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

for review, and the Secretary represents to this court in his 

response that 150 days would be sufficient to finalize the 

rulemaking process. See Resp. at 24. We conclude that it

is proper under these circumstances to deny the petition

without prejudice to petitioners again seeking mandamus 

relief if the DVA should fail to take final action by April 15, 

2024, by which time we fully expect final action to be completed. 

Accordingly, 

* The DVA initiated these rulemaking proceedings 

in 2016. It published a proposed rule in 2020. Based on

more than 70 comments received, the DVA issued a request 

for information in 2021. And since that time, the DVA

states that it has gathered information, held listening sessions, drafted multiple versions of the rule, conducted inter-agency meetings, received and evaluated feedback, and 

recommended its course of action to the Secretary. 

Case: 24-104 Document: 15 Page: 2 Filed: 02/05/2024
IN RE: SWORDS TO PLOWSHARES 3

 IT IS ORDERED THAT: 

The petition is denied. 

February 5, 2024

 Date

FOR THE COURT

 

 

Case: 24-104 Document: 15 Page: 3 Filed: 02/05/2024