alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Wentworth *v.*Philpot.

If a grantor of two pieces of land, in his conveyance of the first, reserves to himself the right to draw water from a well situated on it, this right, though enjoyed by him in his occupation of the second piece, does not pass by his subsequent conveyance of that piece.

When land is convoyed by deed, an easement of convenience merely in other land does not pass by implication.

Case, for obstructing the plaintiff’s right to take water from a well on the defendant’s land, which right the plaintiff claims is appurtenant to the premises occupied by him. Facts found by the court. In 1864 one Dore, being the owner of the land now owned *194by the plaintiff, purchased one undivided third of the Philpot lot, in which the well is located. In 1868 he conveyed his interest in the Philpot lot to the Somersworth Savings-Bank, then the owner of the other two thirds, by a quitclaim deed, which contained this stipulation : “ It is agreed that said Dore shall have the privilege of getting water from the well on said premises, and may enter upon the same in the usual or other convenient way provided by said bank or its assigns.” Afterwards the bank conveyed the whole lot by a quitclaim deed without reservation to one Burleigh, who subsequently conveyed it to the defendant by a warranty deed containing this clause: “ Subject to all the exceptions and reservations which may have been made upon said granted premises by the former owners thereof in their several conveyances, and to all rights which Andrew Dore and his heirs and assigns and all other persons may have to the use of the water in the well on said premises, and a right of way thereto.” After Dore’s death, his widow continued to use the well as before without objection, until May, 1876, when she sold the Wentworth lot to the plaintiff. He then took possession, and used the well on the Philpot lot until about September 10, 1879, when the defendant locked the pump, and has ever since prevented him from taking water from the well.

If upon these facts the action can be maintained, judgment is to be rendered for the plaintiff for $ 15; otherwise for the defendant.

Wheeler, for the plaintiff.

*Wells §•*Burleigh, for the defendant.

Foster, J.

If the right of drawing water, reserved by Dore, was an easement in gross, it has not been conveyed to the plaintiff. It was not reserved as appurtenant to, or part and parcel of, the Dore lot, nor is there any evidence that it is essential to its beneficial enjoyment. *Garrison*v. *Rudd,*19 Ill. 558; *Ackroyd*v. *Smith,*10 C. B. 164, 187.

If the right claimed by the plaintiff could pass by implication as an easement of necessity, like a way of necessity (a point on which we express no opinion), the fact of necessity is not found. The right claimed might be convenient and useful for the plaintiff, but an easement of convenience merely was not conveyed to the plaintiff by implication. *Evans*v. *Dana,*7 R. I. 306, 310; *Grubb*v. *Guilford,*4 Watts 223.

*Judgment for the defendant.*

Clark, J., did not sit: the others concurred.
EX-10.4



 Exhibit 10.4 
 AMENDMENT NO. 1 
 TO THE 

MATTEL, INC. DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN 
 FOR NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS 
 (AS AMENDED AND RESTATED EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1,
2009) 
 WHEREAS, Mattel, Inc. (“Mattel”) maintains the Mattel, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan for
Non-Employee Directors (as amended and restated effective January 1, 2009) (the “Plan”); 

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 5(f) of the Plan, Mattel reserved the right to amend the Plan in whole or in part from time to
time by action of the Board of Directors of Mattel (the “Board”); and 
 WHEREAS, the Committee desires
to amend certain provisions of the Plan to reflect Mattel’s change in the listing of its common stock from the New York Stock Exchange to the Nasdaq Stock Market. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to Section 5(f) of the Plan, the Plan is hereby amended, effective as of November 12, 2009, as follows: 

1. Amendment. All references to the “New York Stock Exchange” in the Plan shall be replaced with references to the
“Nasdaq Stock Market.” 
 2. Ratification and Confirmation. Except as specifically amended hereby, the
Plan is hereby ratified and confirmed in all respects and remains in full force and effect. 
 3. Governing Law.
This Amendment No. 1 shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws of the State of California. 
 4.
Headings. Section headings are for convenience only and shall not be considered a part of this Amendment No. 1. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Mattel has caused this Amendment No. 1 to be executed, effective as of November 12, 2009. 

 

			
	MATTEL, INC.
		
	By:	 	/s/ Alan Kaye
	Name:	 	Alan Kaye
	Title:	 	 Senior Vice President,
 Human
Resources

		
	Dated:	 	December 1, 2009
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-16-00435-CR

Norma Elizabeth Sanchez

v.

The State of Texas

§

§

§

§

§

From County Criminal Court No. 4

of Tarrant County (1363471)

February 8, 2018

Opinion by Justice Meier

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of 

the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By /s/ Bill Meier 

 Justice Bill Meier
#### § 11.124 Conditions.

With respect to any research project or any class of research projects the department or agency head of either the conducting or the supporting Federal department or agency may impose additional conditions prior to or at the time of approval when in the judgment of the department or agency head additional conditions are necessary for the protection of human subjects.
Exhibit 32.1


Certification
of Chief Executive Officer


I,
Theodore L. Tewksbury III of Integrated Device Technology, Inc. (the “Company”),
pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and 18 U.S.C. § 1350, certify to my knowledge
that:





(i)  
the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended
September 27, 2009 (the “Report”) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13a of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended; and





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








Dated:
November 5,
2009


/s/ THEODORE L. TEWKSBURY
III


Theodore L. Tewksbury III


Chief
Executive Officer





A signed
original of this written statement required by Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and 18 U.S.C. § 1350 has been provided to the
Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be
incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or
after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such
filing.
97-2684.

#### State ex rel. Stinson v. Youngstown Osteopathic Hosp.

Franklin App. No. 96APD10-1323. Reported at 83 Ohio St.3d 400, 700 N.E.2d 326. On motion for reconsideration. Motion denied.
§ 1552.7 Verification of eligibility. ( a ) No flight training provider may provide flight training or access to flight training equipment to any individual before establishing that the individual is a U.S. citizen, U.S. national, DoD endorsee, or candidate with a valid Determination of Eligibility resulting from a TSA-accepted security threat assessment completed in accordance with subpart B of this part. ( 1 ) To establish that an individual is a U.S. citizen or a U.S. national, each flight training provider must examine the individual's government-issued documentation as proof of U.S. citizenship or U.S. nationality. A student who claims to be a U.S. citizen or a U.S. national and who fails to provide valid, acceptable identification documents must be denied flight training. A list of acceptable identification documents may be found on the FTSP Portal.
( 2 ) To establish that an individual has been endorsed by the DoD to receive U.S. Government-sponsored flight training in the United States, each flight training provider must use the FTSP Portal to confirm that the endorsee's government-issued photo identification matches the information provided in the U.S. DoD endorsement available on the FTSP Portal. A DoD endorsee is exempt from the requirement to undergo the security threat assessment required by this part if the DoD attaché with jurisdiction for the foreign military pilot's country of citizenship has notified TSA through the FTSP Portal that the pilot may participate in U.S. Government-sponsored flight training.
( 3 ) To establish that a candidate has undergone a TSA-accepted security threat assessment, each flight training provider must use the FTSP Portal to confirm that TSA has issued a Determination of Eligibility to that candidate and that the determination is valid.
( b ) Each flight training provider must immediately terminate a candidate's participation in all ongoing or planned flight training events when TSA either sends a Determination of Ineligibility for that candidate or notifies the flight training provider that the candidate presents a security threat.
( c ) Each flight training provider must acknowledge through the FTSP Portal receipt of any of the following TSA notifications: Determination of Ineligibility; Candidate Security Threat; and Deny Candidate Flight Training.
( d ) Each flight training provider must notify TSA if the provider becomes aware that a candidate is involved in any alleged criminal disqualifying offenses, as described under § 1544.229(d) of this subchapter; is no longer permitted to remain in the United States, as described in § 1552.35; or has reason to believe the individual otherwise poses a security threat.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1836 Engrossed Amendment Senate (EAS)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

                  In the Senate of the United States,

                                                           May 3, 1996.
      Resolved, That the bill from the House of Representatives (H.R. 
1836) entitled ``An Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to 
acquire property in the town of East Hampton, Suffolk County, New York, 
for inclusion in the Amagansett National Wildlife Refuge.'', do pass 
with the following

                               AMENDMENT:

            Page 2, after line 14, insert:

SEC. 2. CORRECTIONS TO COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES MAP.

    (a) In General.--Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment 
of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall make such corrections 
to the map described in subsection (b) as are necessary--
            (1) to move the eastern boundary of the excluded area 
        covering Ocean Beach, Seaview, Ocean Bay Park, and part of 
        Point O'Woods to the western boundary of the Sunken Forest 
        Preserve; and
            (2) to ensure that the depiction of areas as ``otherwise 
        protected areas'' does not include any area that is owned by 
        the Point O'Woods Association (a privately held corporation 
        under the laws of the State of New York).
    (b) Map Described.--The map described in this subsection is the map 
that is included in a set of maps entitled ``Coastal Barrier Resources 
System'', dated October 24, 1990, that relates to the unit of the 
Coastal Barrier Resources System entitled ``Fire Island Unit NY-59P''.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
104th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 1836

_______________________________________________________________________

                               AMENDMENT
```
SERVED: March 30, 2017 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT OF 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS TRANSPORTATIO 

WASHINGTON, DC ZOil M R 3 I A q: 35 

In The Matter Of: 

Peter Hantz Company 

Respondent 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

DOCKET 0 ERATIONS 

Docket No. FAA-2016-4268 

Case No. 201280700041 

ORDER GRANTING RESPONDENT'S THIRD REQUEST 

FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSE TO 

COMPLAINANT'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

On January 31, 201 7, the Complainant filed a Motion for Partial Summary Judgement. 

On February 15, 2017, the Respondent filed an unopposed request to extend the deadline for 

filing a response to Complainant's Motion to March 15, 2017. 

On February 16, 2017, the request was granted. 

On March 8, 2017, the Respondent filed a second unopposed request to extend the deadline, 

this time to March 29, 2017, in order to allow the parties to finalize settlement discussions. 

On March 13, 2017, the request was granted. 

On March 28, 2017, the Respondent filed a third request to extend the deadline, this time to 

April 12, 201 7, in order to allow the parties to finalize settlement discussions. 

Pursuant to 14 C.P.R.§§ 13.205(a)(6) and 13.213(b), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 

1. The Respondent's request is granted. 

2. The Respondent's response to the Complainant's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment 

shall be filed by April 12, 2017. 

.Attachment: Service List 

;!}L- 'DOUGLAS M. RA WALD 

Administrative Law Judge 
SERVICE LIST - BY U.S. MAIL 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1 0001 

ONE COPY 

Timothy I. McCulloch, Respondent's Counsel 

HINSHAW & CULBERTSON LLP 

2375 E. Camelback Rd. 

Suite 750 

Phoenix, AZ 85016 

TEL: 602-631-4400 

F~: 602-631-4404 

Ryan Landers, Complainant's Counsel 

Enforcement Division, Southern Team 

Federal Aviation Administration, Southern Region 

1701 Columbia Avenue 

College Park, GA 30337 

TEL: 404-305-5200 

F ~: 404-305-5223 

The Honorable Douglas M. Rawald, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-5121 Staff Assistant 

F~: 202-366-7536 

Docket No. FAA-2016-4268 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 lnd~pendence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
§ 1019.5 Sexual harassment. ( a ) Members and employees shall not engage in harassment on the basis of sex. Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitute sexual harassment when: ( 1 ) Submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual's employment;
( 2 ) Submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis for employment decisions affecting such individual; or
( 3 ) Such conduct has the purpose or effect of interfering with an individual's work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, offensive, or unpleasant working environment.
( b ) Employees and applicants may follow the standard Equal Employment Opportunity Board complaint process if they believe they have a work-related sexual harassment problem. This requires that the employee or applicant contact an EEO Counselor within 45 days of the alleged harassment or, if a personnel action is involved, within 45 days of its effective date.
( c ) The regulations in this section apply also to harassment based on race, color, religion, or national origin.
#### George F. Gantz and others, Respondents, *v.*John W. Holgate, *Appellant.*

Beargument ordered. Opinion

*Per Curiam.*
#### § 1113.16 Oral argument before the hearing officer.

At the discretion of the hearing officer and upon reasonable notice to the parties, oral argument may be made at the close of testimony before him as an alternative to the filing of written briefs. Such argument, which should include requested findings and conclusions, will be recorded and made a part of the transcript of testimony, and will be available to the Board for consideration in deciding the case. The making of such argument will not preclude oral argument before the Board.

[47 FR 49559, Nov. 1, 1982, as amended at 61 FR 52712, Oct. 8, 1996]
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 135 (Monday, July 16, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38843-38844]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-3450]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[MT-079-07-1010-PH]


Notice of Public Meeting, Western Montana Resource Advisory 
Council Meeting

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act 
(FLPMA) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (FACA), the U.S. 
Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the 
Western Montana Resource Advisory Council will meet as indicated below.

DATES: The next two regular meetings of the Western Montana RAC will be 
held September 5, 2007 at the Dillon Field Office, 1005 Selway Drive, 
Dillon, Montana and November 28, 2007 at the Butte Field Office, 106 
North Parkmont, Butte, Montana beginning at 9 a.m. The public comment 
period for both

[[Page 38844]]

meetings will begin at 11:30 a.m. and the meetings are expected to 
adjourn at approximately 3 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For the Western Montana RAC, contact 
Marilyn Krause, Resource Advisory Council Coordinator, at the Butte 
Field Office, 106 North Parkmont, Butte, Montana 59701, telephone 406-
533-7617.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 15-member Council advises the Secretary 
of the Interior, through the Bureau of Land Management, on a variety of 
planning and management issues associated with public land management 
in western Montana. At the September 5 meeting, topics we plan to 
discuss include updates on the Butte Resource Management Plan, the 
Limestone Hills Legislative EIS, and the North Hills shooting issue. 
Other topics include an outline of the South Tobacco Roots Project, a 
briefing on the process for oil and gas leasing, and a briefing on 
travel management compliance. Recreation fee proposals from the Forest 
Service continue to be on the agenda. Topics for the November 28 
meeting will be determined at the September 5 meeting.
    All meetings are open to the public. The public may present written 
comments to the Council. Each formal Council meeting will also have 
time allocated for hearing public comments. Depending on the number of 
persons wishing to comment and time available, the time for individual 
oral comments may be limited. Individuals who plan to attend and need 
special assistance, such as sign language interpretation, or other 
reasonable accommodations, should contact the BLM as provided below.

    July 9, 2007.
Richard M. Hotaling,
Field Manager.
[FR Doc. 07-3450 Filed 7-13-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-$$-M
#### Redding *v.*Dodge.

Amendments are not allowed when injustice will be done thereby.

Trespass, for the forcible taking and carrying away of the plaintiff’s cattle. Facts found by a referee.

The defendant was, at the time of the taking complained of, and since has been, sheriff of Merrimack county, and one Kenrick was his deputy. Kenrick was also deputy of the sheriff of Belknap county. Kenrick, at S. in Belknap county, attached the plaintiff’s cattle upon a writ against one D., returnable in Merrimack county, which is the taking complained of. On the same day Kenrick drove the cattle to F. in Merrimack county, and five days later sold the same, as a deputy of the defendant, upon the certificate of examiners, and made return of his doings upon the writ. The declaration charges the defendant with the forcible taking and carrying away of the plaintiff’s cattle in S. in the county of Belknap. The plaintiff moved to amend by alleging the taking, &c., to have been done in F. in the county of Merrimack.

*Bolfe,*for the plaintiff.

*JE. B. S.*Sanborn, Shirley, and Mugridge, for the defendant.

Smith, J.

Kenrick was not acting as the deputy of the defendant when he attached and removed the plaintiff’s cattle. If he acted illegally in removing property into Merrimack county which he might lawfully attach in Belknap county, and selling the same upon the certificate of examiners in Merrimack county, — a point upon which we express no opinion, — yet we think it would be inequitable to enable the plaintiff by the proposed amendment to harass the defendant with this suit. Upon the facts reported, justice does not require the allowance of the proposed amendment. *Wendell*v. Mugridge, 19 N. H. 109; *Balter*v. Davis, 22 N. H. 27.

*Case*discharged.

Bingham, J., did not sit: the others concurred.
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: 9
Federal Reserve Bank of: Minneapolis

## Filings received during the week ending October 1, 2011

|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]
[Wednesday, July 12, 1995 (93), Para 93.21 Committee Resignation--Minority]
[Page 1119]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.93.21  committee resignation--minority

  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. HASTINGS, laid before the House the 
following communication, which was read as follows:

                                    Congress of the United States,

                                     House of Representatives,

                                    Washington, DC, July 11, 1995.
     Hon. Newt Gingrich,
     Speaker, House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Speaker: I hereby submit my resignation from the 
     Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, effective July 
     11, 1995.
           Very truly yours,
                                                    Frank Mascara,
                                              Member of Congress. 

  By unanimous consent, the resignation was accepted.
```