alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
STATE OF DELAWARE
 SECRETARY OF STATE DIVISION OF CORPORATIONS FILED 09:00 AM 08/32/1998
 981339244 - 2154412
 CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP AND MERGER  MERGING  AMCOR BIOMASS, INC.  INTO
  AMCOR  CAPITAL CORPORATION  (Pursuant to Section 253 of the  General Corporation Law of Delaware)
  AMCOR Capital Corporation, a Delaware corporation, does hereby certify:
 
 FIRST: That AMCOR Capital Corporation is incorporated pursuant to the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.
 
 SECOND: That AMCOR Capital Corporation owns all of the outstanding shares of the capital stock of AMCOR Biomass, Inc., a Delaware corporation.
 
 THIRD: That AMCOR Capital Corporation, by the following resolutions of its Board of Directors, duly adopted on the 10" day of August, 1998, determined to merge into itself AMCOR Biomass, Inc. on the conditions set forth in such resolutions:
 
 RESOLVED: That AMCOR Capital Corporation merge into itself its subsidiary, AMCOR Biomass, Inc., and assume all of said subsidiary's liabilities and obligations;
 
 RESOLVED FURTHER: That the Chief Executive Officer and the Secretary of AMCOR Capital Corporation be and they hereby are directed to make, execute and acknowledge a certificate of ownership and merger setting forth a copy of the resolution to merge AMCOR Biomass, Inc. into AMCOR Capital Corporation and to assume said subsidiary's liabilities and obligations and the date of adoption thereof and to file the same in the Office of the Secretary of State of Delaware and a certified copy thereof in the Office of the Recorder of Deeds of New Castle County;
 RESOLVED FURTHER: That AMCOR Capital Corporation shall change its corporate name to USA Biomass Corporation; and
 
 RESOLVED FURTHER: That the officers of AMCOR Capital Corporation be, and each of them hereby is, authorized and directed to take all such further actions and to execute and deliver, in the name and on behalf of AMCOR Capital Corporation and under its seal or otherwise, any and all such further documents, certificates and instruments, and to pay all such expenses, as they or any of them may
 
 ccnitow~n.Mhip.mergv ,pd
  deem necessary or advisable to carry out the purposes of the foregoing resolutions and the transactions contemplated thereby; and that the taking of each such action, the execution and delivery of each such document or instrument, and the payment of each such expense shall be conclusive evidence of its necessity or advisability, and that any such action previously taken by any officer of the Corporation in this respect hereby is approved, ratified, adopted and confirmed.
 
 Executed on August 24,  1998.
 
 AMCOR Capital Corporation
 
 By: /s/ Fred H. Behrens
 Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
 
 Attest:
 /s/ Robin E. Swanson
 Robin Swanson, Secretary
**GAO-10-607R**                      Published: Apr 15, 2010. Publicly Released: Apr 15, 2010.                  

-   
-   
-   
-   

    Jump To:  
-  Elder Abuse 
-  Services for Older Adults 
-  State and Local-Level Drivers and Trends 
-  State and Local Fiscal Projections 
-  Federal Borrowing 
-  Managing the Debt 
-  Summary of Funding Provisions 
-  Auditing the Government's Books 
-  Unpacking the Financial Report 
-  Highlights 
-  Recommendations 
-  Background 
-  About This Work 
-  About This Work 
-  Trends 
-  About the Center 
-  Why It's High Risk 
-  What Remains To Be Done 
-  Key Reports 
-  Newest COVID-Related Reports 
-  AI Use Cases 
-  Flood Insurance 
-  Past Pandemic-Related Reports 
-  CARES Act Oversight Reports 
-  All COVID-19 Reports 
-  Report Suspected Fraud 
-  Subjects 
-  How to Get Notified 
-  Past Reports 
-  Public Health Threats 
-  Explore the FY 2022 and 2023 Funds 
-  Lessons Learned 
-  Agency Reports 
-  Recent Reports 
-  Recommendations 
-  Supplemental Material 
-  Full Report 
-  Additional Data 
-  View Decision 
-  Downloads 
-  Previously Identified Actions 
-  Related Pages 
-  Associated Agencies 
-  Tough Choices and Opportunities Ahead 
-  Americas Fiscal Future Key Areas 
-  Retirement Security Key Areas 
-  Current List 
-  About The High Risk List 
-  Area Ratings 
-  Previous High Risk Products 
-  Search Federal Vacancies 
-  Past Federal Vacancies 
-  Violation Letters 
-  About the Yellow Book 
-  Advisory Council 
-  Related Resources 
-  Comment Letters 
-  Related Publications 
-  Contacts and Resources 
-  Major Issues Facing the Nation 
-  Meeting Strategic Challenges 
-  Additional Resources 
-  Resources 
-  GAO Contacts 
-  Mission Teams 
-  Operations and Staff Offices  
-  Organization Chart  
-  Why a Career at GAO? 
-  Am I Qualified? 
-  Company Culture 
-  Reasonable Accommodations 
-  Video Gallery 
-  Paid Internships 
-  Student Volunteers 
-  Professional Development Program 
-  Advancement 
-  Executive Candidate Program 
-  Summer Associates 
-  Externships 
-  Benefits 
-  Contacts 

Skip to Highlights

## Highlights

This report formally transmits the briefing in response to section 2228(e) of title 10 of the United States Code. The statute requires the Comptroller General to provide an analysis of the Department of Defense's budget submission for corrosion prevention and control, as well as an analysis of the corrosion report accompanying defense budget materials, and provide the results to the congressional defense committees within 60 days after submission of the Department of Defense budget.

## Full Report

Full Report (24 pages)

Accessible Text 

## Office of Public Affairs

Sarah Kaczmarek
kaczmareks@gao.gov

(202) 512-4800

## Topics

Budget and Spending

CorrosionBudgetingDefense budgetsBudget functionsBudget obligationsDefense economic analysisCost analysisDefense capabilitiesDefense cost controlStrategic planningBudget outlays
#### William H. Hollister, Jr., *as General Assignee, etc., Plaintiff, v.*Henry R. Russell, *Defendant.*

Order vacating order of arrest affirmed; the part imposing conditions reversed, with ten dollars costs and printing disbursements to defendant.
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1899

To amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit certain conduct relating

to civil disorders.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 20, 1995

Mr. NADLER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit certain

conduct relating to civil disorders.

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 ‘‘Domestic Counter Ter5 rorism Act of 1995’’.

6 SEC. 2. CIVIL DISORDERS.

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 231(a) of title 18, United

8 States Code, is amended.—

9 (1) by striking the one-em dash at the end of

10 paragraph (3) and inserting ‘‘; or’’;
2

•HR 1899 IH

1 (2) by inserting after paragraph (3) the follow2 ing:

3 ‘‘(4) Whoever trains in the use, application, or mak4 ing of any firearm or explosive or incendiary device, or

5 technique capable of causing injury or death to persons,

6 knowing or having reason to know or intending that the

7 same will be unlawfully employed for use in or in further8 ance of a civil disorder which—

9 ‘‘(A) may in any way or degree obstruct, delay,

10 or adversely affect—

11 ‘‘(i) commerce or the movement of any ar12 ticle or commodity in commerce; or

13 ‘‘(ii) the conduct or performance of any

14 federally protected function; or

15 ‘‘(B) is in violation of chapter 13 of this title.’’;

16 and

17 (3) in paragraph (1), by inserting ‘‘or is in vio18 lation of chapter 13 of this title’’ before the semi19 colon.

20 (b) DEFINITION.—Paragraph (7) of section 232 of

21 title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as

22 follows:

23 ‘‘(7) The term ‘law enforcement officer’—

24 ‘‘(A) means any officer or employee of the

25 United States, any State, any political subdivi-
3

•HR 1899 IH

1 sion of a State, or the District of Columbia,

2 while acting in the lawful scope of such officer

3 or employee’s duties;

4 ‘‘(B) includes members of the National

5 Guard (as defined in section 101 of title 10),

6 members of the organized militia of any State

7 or territory of the United States, the Common8 wealth of Puerto Rico, or the District of Colum9 bia, not included within the National Guard (as

10 so defined), and members of the Armed Forces

11 of the United States while engaged in suppress12 ing acts of violence or restoring law and order

13 during a civil disorder.’’.

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 155 (Monday, August 13, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 45248]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-3929]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES


Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information 
Technology; American Health Information Community Population Health and 
Clinical Care Connections Workgroup Meeting

ACTION: Announcement of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the 18th meeting of the American Health 
Information Community Population Health and Clinical Care Connections 
Workgroup [formerly Biosurveillance Workgroup] in accordance with the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. No. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.).

DATES: September 5, 2007, from 12 p.m. to 3 p.m. [Eastern time].

ADDRESSES: Mary C. Switzer Building (330 C Street, S.W., Washington, DC 
20201), Conference Room 4090 (please bring photo ID for entry to a 
Federal building).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: http://www.hhs.gov/healthit/ahic/population/.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Workgroup will continue its discussion 
on how to facilitate the flow of reliable health information among 
population health and clinical care systems necessary to protect and 
improve the public's health.
    The meeting will be available via Web cast. For additional 
information, go to: http://www.hhs.gov/healthit/ahic/population/pop_instruct.html.

    Dated: August 7, 2007.
Judith Sparrow,
Director, American Health Information Community, Office of Programs and 
Coordination, Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information 
Technology.
[FR Doc. 07-3929 Filed 8-10-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4150-24-M
Editorial Note on Part 192
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 192 appear at 71 FR 33406, June 9, 2006.

§ 192.735 Compressor stations: Storage of combustible materials. ( a ) Flammable or combustible materials in quantities beyond those required for everyday use, or other than those normally used in compressor buildings, must be stored a safe distance from the compressor building.
( b ) Aboveground oil or gasoline storage tanks must be protected in accordance with NFPA-30 (incorporated by reference, *see* § 192.7) .
[35 FR 13257, Aug. 19, 1970, as amended by Amdt. 192-119, 80 FR 181, Jan. 5, 2015; 80 FR 46847, Aug. 6, 2015]
-----Original Message----- 

From: krzkt@hotmail.com [mailto:krzkt@hotmail.com] 

Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 5:23 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 25, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Katie Kane 

PO Box 10985 

Glendale, AZ 85318
-----Original Message----- 

From: evolutionman@earthlink.net [mailto:evolutionman@earthlink.net] 

Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 6:23 AM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 25, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

C. ALLAN MILLER 

255 Conti Road 

Brownsville, PA 15417
#### Nathan Boehm, Respondent, v. Adler Distilling Company, Appellant.

Motion for reargument denied, without costs. Opinion

*Per Curiam.*
-----Original Message----- 

From: gerald.meike@wright.edu [mailto:gerald.meike@wright.edu] 

Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 10:31 AM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 25, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Gerald Meike 

3730 Silver Oak 

Riverside, OH 45424
Editorial Note on Part 195
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 195 appear at 71 FR 33409, June 9, 2006.

§ 195.228 Welds and welding inspection: Standards of acceptability. ( a ) Each weld and welding must be inspected to insure compliance with the requirements of this subpart. Visual inspection must be supplemented by nondestructive testing.
( b ) The acceptability of a weld is determined according to the standards in section 9 or Appendix A of API Std 1104 (incorporated by reference, *see* § 195.3). Appendix A of API Std 1104 may not be used to accept cracks.
[Amdt. 195-22, 46 FR 38360, July 27, 1981, as amended by Amdt. 195-52, 59 FR 33397, June 28, 1994; Amdt. 195-81, 69 FR 32898, June 14, 2004; Amdt. 195-99, 80 FR 186, Jan. 5, 2015; Amdt. 195-100, 80 FR 12780, Mar. 11, 2015]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-10106

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

CARLOS TORRES-SALDIVAR,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:09-CR-164-1

Before SMITH, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Carlos TorresSaldivar has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance

with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Torres-Saldivar has not filed a

response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no

nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to

withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein,

and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 26, 2010

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not *

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

Case: 10-10106 Document: 00511274633 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/26/2010
#### NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. WOOSTER DIVISION OF BORG-WARNER CORPORATION, Respondent.

No. 12687.

United States Court of Appeals Sixth Circuit.

Sept. 4, 1958.

Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Washington, D. C., and John A. Hull, Jr., Regional Director, Cleveland, Ohio, for petitioner.

James C. Davis; Squire, Sanders & Dempsey, Cleveland, Ohio, for respondent.

Before MARTIN, MILLER and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of this Court, 236 F.2d 898, having been reversed by the Supreme Court of the United States on May 5, 1958, in National Labor Relations Board v. Wooster Division of Borg-Warner Corporation, 1957, 356 U.S. 342, 78 S.Ct. 718, 2 L.Ed.2d 823.

It is ordered that the mandate issued by this Court on November 6, 1956, be and it is hereby recalled.

And it appearing that the reversal of the judgment of this Court was limited to the single issue of whether the insistence by the respondent that its proposed “ballot” clause calling for a pre-strike secret vote of both union and non-union employees as to the respondent’s last offer be included in any collective bargaining agreement entered into between the respondent and the Union, and that other modifications by this Court of the Board’s order were not affected by ruling of the Supreme Court,

It is ordered that the modification of the Board’s order by this Court on the “ballot” clause issue be set aside, that said order as heretofore modified in other respects be enforced, and the case be remanded to the Board for further proceedings in accordance with the views heretofore expressed by this Court except with respect to said “ballot” clause issue.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM - FORM
10-QSB AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997                          
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                         121,817
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,210,066
<ALLOWANCES>                                   117,441
<INVENTORY>                                     14,457
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,242,885
<PP&E>                                         187,875
<DEPRECIATION>                                 139,776
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,761,011
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          823,675
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       304,271
<OTHER-SE>                                     577,565
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,761,011
<SALES>                                      1,237,332
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,237,332
<CGS>                                          139,821
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  591,647
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (3,439)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,250
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                508,053
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            508,053
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   508,053
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    0.042
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.036
        

</TABLE>
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 Annual Report of Equity  Technologies & Resources,  Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2005, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, Scott A. Haire,  Chief Executive  Officer and Chief Financial  Officer of the
Company,  certify,  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) 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 result of  operations of the
Company.



Date: April 20, 2007     /s/ Scott A. Haire
                         ---------------------
                         Scott A. Haire
                         Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer





-------------------
A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided  to  American  Ammunition,  Inc.  and  will  be  retained  by  American
Ammunition,  Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
Cite as 2013 Ark. 320



## SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS
No. CV-13-498

ARTHUR LEE NEWTON APPELLANT

v. STATE OF ARKANSAS APPELLEE Opinion DeliveredSeptember 5, 2013 PRO SE MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE APPELLANT’S BRIEF [LEE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, 39CV-13-59, HON. L.T. SIMES, JUDGE]

APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTION MOOT.

PER CURIAM In 2011, appellant Arthur Lee Newton was found guilty by a jury in the Drew County Circuit Court of sexual indecency with a child and sexual assault in the second degree. He was sentenced to an aggregate term of 288 months’ imprisonment. The Arkansas Court of Appeals
affirmed. Newton v. State , 2012 Ark. App. 91. In 2013, appellant filed in the Lee County Circuit Court in the county where he was incarcerated a pro se petition for postconviction relief. The petition was correctly docketed as a civil matter inasmuch as appellant was not convicted in that county of the offenses being challenged in the petition. In the petition, appellant alleged that his trial was flawed on the grounds that he was not afforded effective assistance of counsel, that the prosecutor improperly asked leading questions when examining a witness, and that he was made to sign a form acknowledging that he was a sex offender before he was convicted. The petition was denied, and appellant lodged an appeal in this court from the order. Now before us is appellant’s pro se motion for extension of time to file his brief-in-chief. As it is clear from the record that appellant could not prevail on appeal, we dismiss the appeal.Cite as 2013 Ark. 320

The motion is moot. An appeal from an order that denied a petition for postconviction relief will not be permitted to go forward where it is clear that the appellant could not prevail. Watson
v. State , 2012 Ark. 27 (per curiam); Riddell v. State , 2012 Ark. 11 (per curiam). The circuit court in this case did not have jurisdiction to consider the petition for postconviction relief. In Arkansas, claims for postconviction relief are properly raised under Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procedure 37.1 in a petition filed in the court where the judgment of conviction was entered. Ark. R. Crim. P. 37.1(a)(iv) (2011). Even though appellant did not label his petition as a petition under Rule 37.1, a pleading that mounts a collateral attack on a judgment is governed by the provisions of our postconviction rule, Rule 37.1. 1 Holliday v. State , 2013 Ark. 47 (per curiam); Evans v. State , 2012 Ark. 375 (per curiam). Here, appellant filed his petition in the circuit court located in the county where he was in custody; thus, he filed his petition in a court without jurisdiction to consider his claims. Appeal dismissed; motion moot.
Arthur Lee Newton , pro se appellant. No response.

1 The petition also contained allegations concerning the prosecutor’s questioning of the witness and trial error that were a direct attack on the judgment that should have been raised in the trial court at the time of trial. Trial error is a matter for the trial court to address. See Nickelson v. State , 2013 Ark. 252 (per curiam).
2