alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 555.7 Notification to Secretary of State.

Upon publication of a petition in the Federal Register, or on its own motion should it determine to initiate an investigation pursuant to § 555.5, the Commission will notify the Secretary of State of same, and may request action to seek resolution of the matter through diplomatic channels. The Commission may request the Secretary to report the results of such efforts at a specified time.

[54 FR 11533, Mar. 21, 1989. Redesignated at 64 FR 8010, Feb. 18, 1999, and amended at 67 FR 39862, June 11, 2002]
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MICHAEL EARL WATERS, Plaintiff - Appellant,
v. CITY OF CULVER CITY; BROTMAN MEDICAL CENTER, INC.; DON PEDERSEN; ADAM TREANOR; JESSE BUTLER; SCOTT NARIMATSU, Defendants - Appellees. No. 12-55585D.C. No. 2:10-cv-09160-SJOMAN
MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California S. James Otero, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 7, 2013 ** Pasadena, California Before: O’SCANNLAIN, GRABER, and BEA, Circuit Judges. Michael Earl Waters appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civ il Procedure 12(b)(6). He contends that 

# FILED
NOV 12 2013 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).the district court erred in concluding that defendants Brotman Medical Center (“Brotman”) and Dr. Narimatsu were not “state actors.” To state a § 1983 claim, Waters must allege not only that Brotman and Narimatsu were state actors, see George v. Pacific–CSC Work Furlough , 91 F.3d 1227, 1230 (9th Cir. 1996) (per curiam), but also that they acted with “deliberate indifference” in their failure to provi de him adequate medical treatment, see Clouthier v. Cnty. of Contra Costa , 591 F.3d 1232, 1241, 1244 (9th Cir. 2010). We need not reach the state action issue b ecause Waters has not adequately alleged deliberate indifference. See Estelle v. Gamble , 429 U.S. 97, 105–06 (1976). Because dismissal of the § 1983 claim was proper, we do not disturb the district court’s decision to decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Waters’s state law claims against Brotman and Narimatsu. 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3). AFFIRMED
.
§ 58.25-80 Automatic pilots and ancillary steering gear. ( a ) Automatic pilots and ancillary steering gear, and steering-gear control systems, must be arranged to allow immediate resumption of manual operation of the steering-gear control system required in the pilothouse. A switch must be provided, at the primary steering position in the pilothouse, to completely disconnect the automatic equipment from the steering-gear controls.
( b ) Automatic pilots and ancillary steering gear must be arranged so that no single failure affects proper operation and independence of the main or auxiliary steering gear, required controls, rudder-angle indicators, or steering-failure alarm.
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

# District: 8
Federal Reserve Bank of: St. Louis

## Filings received during the week ending March 27, 2010

|Filer | Filing Type | Filing Proposal | End of Comment Period
|----- | ----------- | --------------- | ---------------------
|NONE 

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location | RSSDID | Exam Date | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|---------------------- | ------ | --------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|NONE                  

## CRA Examinations scheduled for     Quarter of

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------
|NONE       

* Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact 
  us
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Monday, May 15, 1995 (66), Para 66.7 Recess--12:06 P.M.]
[Page 699]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.66.7  recess--12:06 p.m.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. FUNDERBURK, pursuant to clause 12 of rule 
I, declared the House in recess at 12 o'clock and 6 minutes p.m., 
subject to the call of the Chair.
```
Editorial Note on Part 91
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 91 appear by USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59779, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 91.55-1 General. ( a ) The following list of required plans is general in character, but includes all plans which normally show construction and safety features coming under the cognizance of the Coast Guard. In the case of a particular vessel, all of the plans enumerated may not be applicable, and it is intended that only those plans and specifications be submitted as will clearly show the vessel's arrangement, construction and required equipment.
( b ) In the following list of required plans, the items which must be approved by the American Bureau of Shipping for vessels classed by that organization are indicated by an asterisk. When prints bearing record of such approval by the American Bureau of Shipping are forwarded to the Coast Guard they will in general be accepted as satisfactory except insofar as the law or the Coast Guard regulations contain requirements which are not covered by the American Bureau of Shipping.
( c ) Plans and specifications for cargo gear shall be approved by either a recognized classification society or the International Cargo Gear Bureau, Inc., whose home office is located at 321 West 44th Street, New York, NY 10036, on the Internet at *http://www.icgb.com .*
[CGFR 65-50, 30 FR 16974, Dec. 30, 1965, as amended by CGD 95-028, 62 FR 51206, Sept. 30, 1997; USCG-2008-0906, 73 FR 56510, Sept. 29, 2008]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

NORTHERN DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff, 

 Case Number: 15-cr-20348 

 v. 

 Honorable Thomas L. Ludington 

MICHAEL LEE WELDON, Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris 

 Defendant. 

_______________________________________/ 

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, ACCEPTING 

DEFENDANT’S PLEA OF GUILTY, AND TAKING THE RULE 11 PLEA 

AGREEMENT UNDER ADVISEMENT 

On October 8, 2015, United States Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris conducted a plea 

hearing pursuant to Defendant’s consent. The Magistrate Judge issued her report the next day, 

October 9, 2015, recommending that this Court accept Defendant’s plea of guilty. 

Although the Magistrate Judge’s report explicitly stated that the parties to this action may 

object to and seek review of the recommendation within fourteen days of service of the report, 

neither Plaintiff nor Defendant filed any objections. The election not to file objections to the 

Magistrate Judge’s report releases the Court from its duty to independently review the record. 

Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). The failure to file objections to the report and 

recommendation waives any further right to appeal. 

 Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation 

(ECF No. 18) is ADOPTED. 

 

1:15-cr-20348-TLL-PTM Doc # 20 Filed 10/29/15 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 67
 It is further ORDERED that Defendant’s plea of guilty is ACCEPTED, and the Rule 11 

Plea Agreement (ECF No. 17) is taken UNDER ADVISEMENT. 

Dated: October 29, 2015 s/Thomas L. Ludington 

 THOMAS L. LUDINGTON 

 United States District Judge 

PROOF OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served 

upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first 

class U.S. mail on October 29, 2015. 

s/Johnetta Curry Williams 

 JOHNETTA CURRY WILLIAMS 

 Acting Case Manager 

1:15-cr-20348-TLL-PTM Doc # 20 Filed 10/29/15 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 68
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 116 (Monday, June 18, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33450-33456]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-2986]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Transmittal No. 07-26]


36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification

AGENCY: Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text 
of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to 
fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 
July 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. J. Hurd, DSCA/DBO/ADM, (703) 604-
6575.
    The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives, Transmittal 07-26 with attached transmittal, policy 
justification, and Sensitivity of Technology.

    Dated: June 11, 2007.
C.R. Choate,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M

[[Page 33451]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN18JN07.000


[[Page 33452]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN18JN07.001


[[Page 33453]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN18JN07.002


[[Page 33454]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN18JN07.003


[[Page 33455]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN18JN07.004


[[Page 33456]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN18JN07.005

[FR Doc. 07-2986 Filed 6-15-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-C
#### William B. Ditmars, *Respondent, v.*Abraham M. Levy, *Appellant, Impleaded, etc.*

Judgment and order denying new trial and order of 2d of March, 1883, discontinuing action as to same defendants affirmed,witb costs. Opinion by

Pratt, J.
§ 71.20-20 Specific tests and inspections. The applicable tests and inspections relating to annual inspection as set forth in subpart 71.25 shall be made at this time. In addition, the following specific tests and inspections shall be made by the inspector: ( a ) For inspection procedures of lifesaving appliances and arrangements, see subchapter W (Lifesaving Appliances and Arrangements) of this chapter.
( b ) Installation of carbon dioxide or clean agent extinguishing piping in accordance with 46 CFR 76.15-15 and 46 CFR subpart 95.16.
( c ) For inspection procedures of marine engineering equipment and systems, see subchapter F (Marine Engineering) of this chapter.
( d ) For inspection procedures of electrical engineering equipment and systems, see subchapter J (Electrical Engineering) of this chapter.
( e ) For inspection and testing standards of structural subdivision integrity, see § 72.01-25 of this subchapter.
( f ) For inspection and testing of watertight doors, see § 170.270 of this chapter.
[CGFR 65-50, 30 FR 16895, Dec. 30, 1965, as amended by CGD 79-023, 48 FR 51007, Nov. 4, 1983; CGD 84-069, 61 FR 25287, May 20, 1996; USCG-2006-24797, 77 FR 33874, June 7, 2012]
New Jersey Department of Labor, Workmen’s Compensation Bureau.

#### ANNA MILAS, PETITIONER, v. BOUND BROOK CRUSHED STONE COMPANY, RESPONDENT.

Eor the petitioner, *Henry Carless.*

For the respondent, *T. Crawford Jamieson,*representing *Richard W. Baker.*

It being represented to me that counsel for the respective parties consents to the entry of a judgment of $10 per week until the dependent, George Milas, mentioned in the petition, attains the age of sixteen years; the payment of $150 on account of funeral expenses and a counsel fee of $400 to Henry Carless, counsel for the petitioner, one-half of which sum to be paid by each of the parties. The following representations were made to me:

That Anna Milas, the petitioner, was formerly the wife of Michael Bushinsky, by whom she had four children mentioned in the petition as Mary Bushinsky, Catherine Bushinsky, Michael Bushinsky and Julia Bushinsky. Her husband died in September, 1926. George Milas was a boarder at the home of the Bushinsky’s. Anna Milas, the petitioner, about December, 1926, went to live with him on a farm near Bound Brook. The four children of the Bushinsky’s lived there and one or more boarders. On July 12th, 1927, the said George Milas met with an accident while working for respondent, which caused his death at the Somerset Hospital, Somerville, New Jersey, on July 15th, 1927. Just before *655he died he went through a marriage ceremony at the hospital with the petitioner, which ceremony was performed by Herbert E. Durhan, recorder of the borough of Somerville. On January 16th, 1928, about six months after the death of George Milas, the said Anna Milas gave birth to the child mentioned in the petition as George Milas. The petitioner claimed that she was the common-law wife of George Milas from about December, 1926. The respondent denied this and claimed that it could not be, because he had a wife living in Europe and that during the period between December, 1926, and July, 1927, the said George Milas and Anna Milas did not live together as man and wife. The respondent also claimed that the child born on January 16th, 1928, was not the child of George Milas. Also that the respondent had paid to the petitioner $150 toward the funeral expenses of George Milas and a payment of $200 which it claimed was paid in settlement of all claims against the respondent.

* * ❖ *% i',< %*

Charles E. Corbin, *Deputy Commissioner.*
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Monday, May 15, 1995 (66), Para 66.16 Recess--1:36 P.M.]
[Page 700]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.66.16  recess--1:36 p.m.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. WELLER, pursuant to clause 12 of rule I, 
declared the House in recess at 12 o'clock and 6 minutes p.m., until 
5:00 p.m.
```
Argued, and submitted February 28,

reversed and remanded for reconsideration October 11, 1995

#### WAYNE STEVEN MARTIN, *Petitioner, v.*BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION, *Respondent.*

(CA A82840)

903 P2d 419

Alan H. Biedermann, Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief was Sally L. Avera, Public Defender.

Robert K. Lau, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Theodore R. Kulongoski, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General.

Before Riggs, Presiding Judge, and Landau and Leeson, Judges.

PER CURIAM

Reversed and remanded for reconsideration. *Fernandez v. Board of Parole,*137 Or App 247, 904 P2d 1071 (1995).
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 123 (Wednesday, June 27, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 35259]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-3146]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Reclamation


Notice of Charter Renewal; California Bay-Delta Public Advisory 
Committee Charter Renewal

AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of renewal.

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

SUMMARY: This notice is published in accordance with Section 9(a)(2) of 
the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (Pub. L. 92-463). Following 
consultation with the General Services Administration, notice is hereby 
given that the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) is renewing the 
charter for the California Bay-Delta Public Advisory Committee 
(Committee). The purpose of the Committee is to provide advice and 
recommendations to the Secretary on implementation of the CALFED Bay-
Delta Program (Program) as described in the Programmatic Record of 
Decision which outlines the long-term comprehensive solution for 
addressing the problems affecting the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento-San 
Joaquin Delta Estuary, Public Law 108-361, and other applicable law. 
Specific responsibilities of the Committee include: (1) Making 
recommendations on annual priorities and coordination of Program 
actions to achieve balanced implementation of the Program elements; (2) 
providing recommendations on effective integration of Program elements 
to provide continuous, balanced improvement of each of the Program 
objectives (ecosystem restoration, water quality, levee system 
integrity, and water supply reliability); (3) evaluating implementation 
of Program actions, including assessment of Program area performance; 
(4) reviewing and making recommendations on Program Plans and Annual 
Reports describing implementation of Program elements as set forth in 
the ROD to the Secretary; (5) recommending Program actions taking into 
account recommendations from the Committee's subcommittees; and (6) 
liaison between the Committee's subcommittees, the State and Federal 
agencies, the Secretary and the Governor.
    The Committee consists of 20 to 30 members who are appointed by the 
Secretary, in consultation with the Governor.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Diane Buzzard, CALFED Program Manager, 
Bureau of Reclamation, 2800 Cottage Way, Sacramento, California 95821-
1898, telephone 916-978-5525.
    The certification of Charter renewal is published below:

Certification

    I hereby certify that Charter renewal of the California Bay-Delta 
Public Advisory Committee is in the public interest in connection with 
the performance of duties imposed on the Department of the Interior.

Dirk Kempthorne,
Secretary of the Interior.
[FR Doc. 07-3146 Filed 6-26-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-MN-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          2,479
<SECURITIES>                                      394
<RECEIVABLES>                                  41,181
<ALLOWANCES>                                    2,577
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    0
<PP&E>                                        936,213
<DEPRECIATION>                                164,583
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                919,546
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               0
<BONDS>                                       706,196
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                     4,600
<COMMON>                                          135
<OTHER-SE>                                     41,531
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  919,546
<SALES>                                        30,781
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              157,631
<CGS>                                          26,278
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 106,554
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               17,376
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                3,109
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             91,736
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                10,298
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            10,298
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                   10,298
<EPS-BASIC>                                       .75
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .75


</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.1**

** **

**CERTIFICATION PURUSANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of New Energy Technologies, Inc. (the“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending May 31, 2010, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on July 15, 2010 (the “Report”), I, MeeteshPatel, President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

(1) The Report fullycomplies 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 materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

 

** **

Date:  July 15, 2010                                            /s/Meetesh Patel 

                                                                                MeeteshPatel

                                                                                President,Chief Executive Officer, and Chief Financial Officer

 

 

 

----
EXHIBIT 23



               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 No. 33-39446) pertaining to the 1987 Incentive Stock Option and
Appreciation Plan, 1990 Stock Option Plan for Non-Employee Directors and Options
Granted to Certain Officers, Directors, Consultants and Scientific Advisory
Board Members under Written Compensation Agreements; (Form S-8 No. 33-48044)
pertaining to Options Granted Certain Officers, Directors, Consultants and
Scientific Advisory Board Members under Written Compensation Agreements; (Form
S-8 No. 33-50156 and No. 33-82310) pertaining to the 1992 Stock Option/Stock
Issuance Plan; (Form S-8 No. 333-36879) pertaining to the 1997 Stock Incentive
Plan; (Form S-3 No. 33-55520, No. 33-61935, No. 333-08659 and No. 333-62955)
pertaining to the registration of shares of Advanced Tissue Sciences, Inc.
Common Stock of our report dated January 29, 1999, with respect to the
consolidated financial statements of Advanced Tissue Sciences, Inc., and our
report dated January 18, 1999, with respect to the combined financial statements
of the Dermagraft Joint Venture included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K/A) of
Advanced Tissue Sciences, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 1998.


                                                       /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

                                                       ERNST & YOUNG LLP

San Diego, California
September 10, 1999
Order entered July 23, 2018

In The



## Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 17

- 01427

- CR

CHARLES RAY GRAY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 366th Judi cial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 366

- 82047

- 2015



### O RDER

Before the Court is the State’s July 20, 2018 motion for extension of time to file its brief.

We GRANT the motion and ORDER the brief received July 20 filed as of the da te of this order.

/s/ CRAIG STODDART

JUSTICE