alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 80.364 Frequencies for VHF digital small message services (VDSMS).

Frequencies in the 156-162 MHz band may be used for VHF digital small message services (VDSMS) complying with RTCM 12301 (incorporated by reference, *see* § 80.7), except as follows

| Channel | Frequency (MHz) |
| --- | --- |
| 01A | 156.050 |
| 63A | 156.175 |
| 05A | 156.250 |
| 65A | 156.275 |
| 06 | 156.300 |
| 66A | 156.325 |
| 67 | 156.375 |
| 70 | 156.525 |
| 12 | 156.600 |
| 13 | 156.650 |
| 73 | 156.675 |
| 14 | 156.700 |
| 74 | 156.725 |
| 15 | 156.750 |
| 75 | 156.775 |
| 16 | 156.800 |
| 76 | 156.825 |
| 17 | 156.850 |
| 77 | 156.875 |
| 20A | 157.000 |
| 22A | 157.100 |
| AIS 1/2 | 161.975/162.025 |

VHF-FM Channels Not Available for Digital Small Message Service

[81 FR 90747, Dec. 15, 2016]
§ 80.864 Emergency electric lights. ( a ) Emergency electric light(s) must be installed to illuminate the operating controls of the radiotelephone installation at the principal operating position, the card of instructions, and the radiotelephone station clock if the latter is not self-illuminated.
( b ) The emergency electric light(s) must be energized from the reserve power supply, if a reserve power supply is required. In cases where a reserve power supply is not required, the emergency lights must be energized independently of the system which supplies the normal lighting.
# Map            Tanzania.
#### PRESTON’S ESTATE v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE.

No. 115, Docket 21748.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Argued Feb. 14, 1951.

Decided March 6, 1951.

*532Polikoff & Clareman, New York City (Benet Polikoff, Jack Clareman, New York City, of counsel); for petitioner.

Charles Oliphant, Washington, D. C., Theron Lamar Caudle, Asst. Atty. Gen., Ellis N. Slack; Lee A. Jackson, I. Henry Kutz, Special Assts. to the Atty. Gen., for respondent.

Before CHASE, CLARK and FRANK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

The question here presented is whether the trust which we held valid in Preston v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 2 Cir., 132 F.2d 763 was revocable by the grantor. We then held that the grantor, Preston, could take deductions on his income tax return for the interest he paid' on his personal bond under seal which became the corpus of the trust. His obligation to pay such interest had been established by the decision of the state court, United States Trust Co., of New York v. Preston, 264 App.Div. 152, 34 N.Y.S.2d 646, and familiarity with the opinion in each of those easqs will be assumed.

The beneficiary, Alice Gwynne Preston, died on December 23, 1946 after a period of mental illness. She had paid an income tax on the amounts she received from the trust each year until 1943 but thereafter such receipts were omitted from the gross income reported in returns filed by, or for, her. In this proceeding her administratrix is seeking to have reversed a decision of the tax court holding that such receipts were the taxable income of the deceased. The ground relied on for that is the contention that the trust was revocable and consequently its income was taxable to the grantor under Section 166 of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C.A. § 166, and not to the beneficiary whom this petitioner represents.

The terms of the trust and the above decisions completely refute the assertion that this trust was revocable. The grantor had no option but to pay the interest on his bond to the corporate trustee for distribution according to the fixed provisions of the trust instrument. The first decision of the Board of Tax Appeals, William P. T. Preston, Preston v. C. I. R., 44 B.T.A. 973 would, indeed, give support to the petitioner’s position but the reversal of that decision and what has since been decided in respect to this very trust leaves it without present importance. Cf. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Sunnen, 333 U.S. 591, 68 S.Ct. 715, 92 L.Ed. 898. The reversion to the grantor when the trust terminated at the death of the survivor of the named beneficiaries did not make Sec. 166, I.R.C., applicable. Helvering v. Wood, 309 U.S. 344, 60 S.Ct. 551, 84 L.Ed. 796. Here, as there, the necessary power to revest or revoke was lacking.

Affirmed.
Order entered April 21 , 2016

In The



## Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 15

- 00143

- CR

TORRY GOODSON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 4

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Ca use No. F13

- 62599

- K



### O RDER

The Court REINSTATES the appeal.

This Court twice abated the appeal for findings regarding supplementation of the record

with the jury notes . On April 20, 2016, we received a supplemental record containing the jury

notes and t he trial court’s response to the notes. Accordingly, the appeal may now proceed.

We ORDER appellant to file his brief within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this order.

We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order to counsel for all parties.

/s/ ADA BROW N

JUSTICE
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, September 08, 2021.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, September 08, 2021

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A22I0021. KATHY COOTS v. STEFANIE WOHLGEMUTH.

Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of 

this order. The Clerk of Superior Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record 

transmitted to the Court of Appeals.

LC NUMBERS:

19A04189
#### § 32.3999 Instructions for balance sheet accounts—liabilities and stockholders' equity.

| Account title | |
| --- | --- |
| Current liabilities: | |
| Current accounts and notes payable | 4000 |
| Customer's Deposits | 4040 |
| Income taxes—accrued | 4070 |
| Other taxes—accrued | 4080 |
| Net Current Deferred Nonoperating Income Taxes | 4100 |
| Net Current Deferred Nonoperating Income Taxes | 4110 |
| Other current liabilities | 4130 |
| Long-term debt: | |
| Long Term debt and Funded debt | 4200 |
| Other liabilities and deferred credits: | |
| Other liabilities and deferred credits | 4300 |
| Unamortized operating investment tax credits—net | 4320 |
| Unamortized nonoperating investment tax credits—net | 4330 |
| Net noncurrent deferred operating income taxes | 4340 |
| Net deferred tax liability adjustments | 4341 |
| Net noncurrent deferred nonoperating income taxes | 4350 |
| Deferred tax regulatory adjustments—net | 4361 |
| Other jurisdictional liabilities and deferred credits—net | 4370 |
| Stockholder's equity: | |
| Capital stock | 4510 |
| Additional paid-in capital | 4520 |
| Treasury stock | 4530 |
| Other capital | 4540 |
| Retained earnings | 4550 |

Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity Accounts To Be Maintained by Companies

[82 FR 20842, May 4, 2017]
No. 11-9824.

#### Wade *v.*Office of Personnel Management.

C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5131

To amend the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 to prohibit

the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development from recapturing,

adjusting, withdrawing, or reducing any UDAG funds from recipients

of UDAG grants, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 28, 1994

Mr. HINCHEY (for himself and Mr. KANJORSKI) introduced the following bill;

which was referred to the Committee on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs.

A BILL

To amend the Housing and Community Development Act

of 1974 to prohibit the Secretary of Housing and Urban

Development from recapturing, adjusting, withdrawing,

or reducing any UDAG funds from recipients of UDAG

grants, and for other purposes.

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

3 SECTION 1. UDAG RECAPTURES.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 119(g) of the Housing

5 and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C.

6 5318(g)) is amended by striking the second sentence and

7 inserting the following: ‘‘Except as provided in section
2

•HR 5131 IH

1 232(c) of the Multifamily Housing Property Disposition

2 Reform Act of 1994, during the 18-month period begin3 ning on the date on which the UDAG Retention Program

4 authorized by such section expires, the Secretary shall be

5 prohibited from recapturing, adjusting, withdrawing, or

6 reducing any UDAG funds from recipients of UDAG

7 grants. For the duration of the UDAG Retention Pro8 gram, the Secretary—

9 ‘‘(1) shall provide technical assistance to grant

10 recipients to adjust, rework, relocate, refine, rede11 fine, or otherwise revise the original UDAG project

12 description to produce a viable UDAG project in ac13 cordance with the requirements of this section; and

14 ‘‘(2) shall not impose regulatory requirements

15 that are not statutorily based if such requirements

16 restrict the revision or use of UDAG funding, in17 cluding any requirement that amendments to an

18 urban development action grant agreement must be

19 for activities that are ‘integrally related activities’ in

20 relation to the approved project.’’.

21 (b) EXTENSION OF TIME PERIOD.—Section 119(t) of

22 the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974

23 (42 U.S.C. 5318(t)) is amended by striking ‘‘90 days’’

24 each place it appears and inserting ‘‘21 months’’.

Æ
-#-



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Global Tech Capital Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended December 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



1.

I have reviewed Report;

2.

Based on my knowledge, the 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 the Report;

3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in the Report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in the Report;

4.

I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the Company and have:

(a)

designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the Company is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which the Report is being prepared;

(b)

evaluated the effectiveness of the Companys disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of the Report (the Evaluation Date); and

(c)

presented in the Report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

1.

I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the Companys auditors and the audit committee of Companys board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)

all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the Companys ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the Companys auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

(b)

any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and

1.

I have indicated in the Report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of my most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.



Date:  January 29, 2003



Michael Mitsiadis



Michael Mitsiadis

President and Chief Executive Officer
---

Exhibit 32.2

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

Solely for the purposes of complying with, and the extent
required by 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned certifies, in his capacity as the
Chief Financial Officer of Jupiter Enterprises, Inc. (the Company) that, to
his knowledge:

- the periodic report of the Company on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June
  30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
  hereof (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
  or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and
- the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
  respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|Date: October 8, 2007 | By: | /s/Alexander Chen    
|--------------------- | --- | -----------------------
|                      |     | Alexander Chen,        
|                      |     | Chief Financial Officer

---
#### § 69.705 Procedure.

Price cap LECs filing petitions for pricing flexibility shall follow the procedures set forth in § 1.774 of this chapter.
Order filed January 26, 2017 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-16-00921-CV

____________

IN THE INTEREST OF C.M.-L.G. AKA K.M.G, K.D.D. AND K.D.D., 

CHILDREN

On Appeal from the 313th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2015-05863J

ORDER

This is an accelerated appeal from a judgment in a suit in which the 

termination of the parent-child relationship is at issue. Both the father, E.D., and the 

mother, M.D.Y., filed notices of appeal. Appellants’ briefs were due on January 9, 

2017. Appellant E.D., represented by appointed counsel, Donald M. Crane, filed his 

brief on January 9, 2017. Appellant M.D.Y., represented by appointed counsel, 

William M. Thursland, filed a second request for an extension of time on January 9, 

2017, but no brief.
On January 11, 2017, this court denied the motion and ordered appellant 

M.D.Y.’s appointed counsel, William M. Thursland, to file a brief on or before 

January 23, 2017. No brief was filed. Accordingly, we issue the following order.

We ORDER the judge of the 313th District Court to immediately conduct a 

hearing to determine (1) the reason for the failure to file a brief; (2) whether appellant

M.D.Y. desires to continue this appeal; and (3) if appellant desires to continue the 

appeal, a date certain when appellant’s brief will be filed. The judge shall appoint 

new appellate counsel for appellant M.D.Y. 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. The transcribed record of the 

hearing, and supplemental clerk’s record shall be filed with the clerk of this court on 

or before February 10, 2017.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Jamison, and Donovan.
No. 11-6016.

#### Koons *v.*United States.

C. A. 7th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
Editorial Note on Part 97
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 97 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

§ 97.101 General standards. ( a ) In all respects not specifically covered by FCC Rules each amateur station must be operated in accordance with good engineering and good amateur practice.
( b ) Each station licensee and each control operator must cooperate in selecting transmitting channels and in making the most effective use of the amateur service frequencies. No frequency will be assigned for the exclusive use of any station.
( c ) At all times and on all frequencies, each control operator must give priority to stations providing emergency communications, except to stations transmitting communications for training drills and tests in RACES.
( d ) No amateur operator shall willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any radio communication or signal.
"F

580

L IB E R T Y S T

H A M P T O N R D

R O S LY N R D

W IL L IS O N R D

G R E E N B R IA R S T

F O N T A N A

B E

L N

L L E M E A D E S T

MICHIGAN

MICHIGAN

MACOMB CO

WAYNE CO

WAYNE CO

WAYNE CO

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

CANADA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

CANADA

Milk

River

Lake

St Clair

Lake St Clair

Gross Point

Shores

GrossePointe

Shores

W C Miller Memorial

Light

Gaukler

Point

Grosse

Pointe

OE E

Saint

Clair

Flats

Belle

Isle

Mount

Clemens

West

Mount

Clemens

East

Grosse

Pointe

47

30"

30"

000m

98

N

82°

47

42°22' 3

99

46

48

50'

46

04

95

46

97

30" 530

47

96

99

13

50 53

47

46

E

27'

52

550 3

03

02

000 FEET

98

82°

3

3 3

42°

46

3

46

55

25'

FEET

93

00

47

52'

3

46

3

46

01

46

47

05

54 E

30"

47

04

000

3

30"

06

FEET

30"

05

000m 3

13

47'

3

02

30'

3

47

54

25'

45'

000

27'

46 3

LG

46

94

47

94

360

50

47

LH

47'

LG

42°

46

3

30'

82°

42°

82° 30"

47

00

3

46

30"

3 56

47

03

000 FEET

45'

47

3

3 52

06

95

3 51

22'

96

48

LH

N

330

52' 50' 53

47

97

55

49 000m

000m

49

46

47

51

01

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

MICHIGAN

ADJOINING 7.5' QUADRANGLES

QUADRANGLE LOCATION

GROSSE POINTE OE E, MI

2011

Interstate Route State Route

ROAD CLASSIFICATION

Ramp 4WD

US Route Local Road

WX Interstate Route /. US Route H State Route

GROSSE POINTE OE E QUADRANGLE

MICHIGAN

7.5-MINUTE SERIES

This map was produced to conform with version 0.5.10

of the USGS US Topo Product Standard.

A metadata file associated with this product is draft version 0.5.16

CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 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

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

Roads...............................................©2006-2010 Tele Atlas

Names...............................................................GNIS, 2010

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 17T

Produced by the United States Geological Survey

10 000-foot ticks: Michigan Coordinate System of 1983

(south zone)

U.S. National Grid

100,000-m Square ID

Grid Zone Designation

LH

LG

47 00

17T

×

Ø

MN

GN

UTM GRID AND 2011 MAGNETIC NORTH DECLINATION AT CENTER OF SHEET

1° 13 ́

22 MILS

7° 35 ́

135 MILS
**Exhibit 31.1**
**CERTIFICATIONS**
I, Randy K. Ferrell, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Fauquier Bankshares,Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement ofa material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially 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 ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknessesin the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.   Date: November 12, 2004 /s/ Randy K. Ferrell   Randy K. Ferrell President and Chief Executive Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 08-7735

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee, 

 v. 

MICHAEL ROBINSON, 

 Defendant - Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District 

Judge. (3:03-cr-00194-HEH-1) 

Submitted: February 24, 2009 Decided: March 26, 2009 

Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. 

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Michael Robinson, Appellant Pro Se. Brian Lee Whisler, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

Michael Robinson appeals the district court’s order 

denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for reduction 

of sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible 

error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the 

district court. United States v. Robinson, No. 

3:03-cr-00194-HEH-1 (E.D. Va. Aug. 8, 2008). We deny Robinson’s 

motion to appoint counsel. 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 

decisional process. 

AFFIRMED
Editorial Note on Part 11
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 11 appear at 67 FR 38208, June 3, 2002.

§ 11.22 Appearance and practice. ( a ) Subject to the provisions of 43 CFR 1.3, the respondent may appear in person, by representative, or by counsel, and may participate fully in these proceedings.
( b ) Department counsel designated by the Solicitor of the Department shall represent the Director in these proceedings. Upon notice to the Director of the assignment of an administrative law judge to the case, said counsel shall enter his appearance on behalf of the Director and shall file all petitions and correspondence exchanged by the Director and the respondent pursuant to subpart B of this part, which shall become part of the hearing record. Thereinafter, service upon the Director in these proceedings shall be made to his counsel.