alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
S. 1026

One Hundred Seventh Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,

the twenty-third day of January, two thousand and two

An Act

To designate the United States Post Office located at 60 Third Avenue in Long

Branch, New Jersey, as the ‘‘Pat King Post Office Building’’.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF PAT KING POST OFFICE BUILDING.

The United States Post Office located at 60 Third Avenue

in Long Branch, New Jersey, shall be known and designated as

the ‘‘Pat King Post Office Building’’.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

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

or other record of the United States to the United States Post

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

to the Pat King Post Office Building.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
EXHIBITS INDEX


                              SILVERADO MINES LTD.

                     Exhibits Filed with Report on Form 10-K
                       Fiscal year ended November 30, 1996




                Exhibit (23) Consent of KPMG Peat Marwick Thorne

<PAGE>
KPMG
Chartered Accountants
Box 10426 777 Dunsmuir Street
Vancouver BC V7Y 1K3 Canada

Telephone (604)691-3000
Telefax   (604)691-3031

http://www.kpmg.ca


INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S CONSENT

The Board of Directors
Silverado Mines Ltd.


We consent to incorporation  by reference in the Registration  Statement on Form
S-8 (SEC File No.  33-78098) of Silverado Mines Ltd. of our report dated January
17, 1997 relating to the consolidated  balance sheets of Silverado Mines Ltd. as
of  November  30,  1996 and 1995,  and the related  consolidated  statements  of
operations and accumulated deficit,  cash flows and changes in share capital and
capital  surplus for each of the years in the three year period  ended  November
30, 1996,  which report  appears in the November 30, 1996 annual  report on Form
10-K of Silverado Mines Ltd.

Our auditors'  report  relating to the financial  statements  referred to in the
preceding  paragraph is supplemented by a report entitled  "Comments By Auditors
For U.S.  Readers On Canada-U.S.  Reporting  Conflict" that states that Canadian
reporting  standards  do not  permit  reference  to  uncertainties  such  as the
Company's  ability to continue as a going  concern  and recover  reported  asset
amounts,  as discussed in Note 1(a) to the  consolidated  financial  statements,
when the uncertainties are adequately  disclosed in the financial statements and
accompanying  notes. Under United States reporting  standards such uncertainties
would be described in the auditors' report in an explanatory paragraph following
the opinion paragraph.



/S/ KPMG

Vancouver, Canada
March 27, 1997
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 168 (Thursday, August 31, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 60249]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-18785]



[[Page 60249]]

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

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail and USPS Ground Advantage[supreg] 
Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: August 31, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
August 23, 2023, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage[supreg] Contract 
38 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, 
Docket Nos. MC2023-246, CP2023-249.

Sean Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2023-18785 Filed 8-30-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
# Bahrain Conducts Fifth Sentinel Shield Exercise with IMSC

/ Published Aug. 25, 2022
MANAMA, Bahrain, 
Forces from Bahrain and the United States completed a joint exercise in the Arabian Gulf, Aug. 23, led by a nine-nation coalition staff based in the Middle East.Royal Bahrain Naval Force ship RBNS Ahmed Al-Fateh (P20) and U.S. Coast Guard patrol boat USCGC Baranof (WPB 1318) participated in exercise Sentinel Shield with a Saildrone Explorer unmanned surface vessel from U.S. 5th Fleet.Sentinel Shield is a monthly exercise series organized by the International Maritime Security Construct (IMSC) to enhance communication and coordination among partner naval forces. This month’s iteration was the first designed to integrate unmanned systems.“The continued interoperability and coordination of U.S. and Bahraini naval assets are crucial to stability in the Arabian Gulf,” said Lt. Vaughn Gehman, commanding officer of Baranof. “Integration of unmanned systems is a force-multiplier for IMSC and its ability to detect and deter malign activity.”IMSC was formed in July 2019 in response to increased threats to freedom of navigation for merchant mariners transiting international waters in the Middle East. Coalition Task Force (CTF) Sentinel was established four months later to deter state-sponsored malign activity and reassure the merchant shipping industry in the Bab al-Mandeb and Strait of Hormuz.The coalition is headquartered in Bahrain under U.S. 5th Fleet and includes forces from Albania, Bahrain, Estonia, Lithuania, Romania, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, and United States.“I was delighted to see our host nation participating in this month's exercise, and especially pleased to again see Bahrain leading the way in unmanned systems integration,” said British Royal Navy Commodore Ben Aldous, commander of IMSC and CTF Sentinel.In October, Bahrain was the first nation U.S. 5th Fleet partnered with after establishing a new unmanned systems and artificial intelligence task force. During a two-day training exercise, U.S. patrol craft and Bahrain Defense Force maritime assets sailed alongside Mantas T-12 unmanned surface vessels in the Arabian Gulf, marking the first time the platforms operated in regional waters.“Incorporating unmanned systems into Sentinel Shield enables the coalition to plan for the future by developing and exercising concepts of employment that most effectively utilize this new technology to benefit the Sentinel mission and strengthen our coalition,” said Aldous.
**Exhibit
      32.2**











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 filing of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of South Jersey
      Gas Company (the “Company”) for the period ended September 30, 2007, as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      I, David A. Kindlick, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:





(1)           The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 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 results of operations of the Company.








/s/
      David
      A. Kindlick


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


Name:
      David A. Kindlick


Title:
      Chief Financial Officer


November
      9, 2007
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 70 Agreed to House (ATH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 70

 Designating majority membership on certain standing committees of the 
                                 House.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 28, 2001

Mr. Foley submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 
                               agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Designating majority membership on certain standing committees of the 
                                 House.

    Resolved, That the following named Member be, and she is hereby, 
elected to the following standing committee of the House of 
Representatives:
    Committee on Small Business: Ms. Capito of West Virginia.
                                 <all>
```
#### ANNA M. HARRISON, Appellant, *v.*GEORGE SWART and MARY E. SWART, Respondents.

*Costs*— *when to le allowed, as of course, to a successful appellant, on appeal from a judgment of dispossession in summary proceedings*— *Code of Civil Procedure, secs.*2260, 3066, 3240.

Where a judgment recovered by a plaintiff in summary proceedings to recover the possession of land, instituted before a justice of the peace, is reversed, upon an appeal to the County Court, the defendant is entitled to costs, as of ■ course, under the provisions of sections 2260 and 3066 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Appeal from an order of the Ulster County Court, denying a motion to set aside a judgment for costs.

*William JD.*Brinnier, for the appellant.

*George Van*Etten, for the respondents.

Learned, P. J.:

The plaintiff took summary proceedings before a justice of the-peace to recover possession of premises, and recovered. The defendants appealed to the County Court and the matter was reversed. The defendants thereupon entered a judgment against plaintiff for costs. The plaintiff moved to set the judgment for costs aside. The motion was denied and plaintiff appeals. Section 2260 of the-*260Code says that appeals in such cases may be taken in like manner as from a judgment, etc., and *with Mice effect.*It is reasonable to apply tbe words “ *with Mice effect”*to tbe matter of costs on appeal. ■ Section 3066, subdivision 4, gives costs as of course on appeal from a judgment wliere the judgment is reversed. Section 3240, as amended in 1881, puts costs on appeal in special proceedings in tbe discretion of the court, *where they are not specially regulated*in tbe act.

It seems to us tbat the effect of sections 2260 and 3066 is to specially regulate costs in these summary proceedings, appealed from a justice’s court. the plaintiff in the present case argues tbat section 3240 applies on the ground tbat costs on this appeal are *not*specially regulated. And therefore insists tbat as the costs in this ■ case were not given by the court they cannot be bad. It should be noticed, however, tbat the judge who reversed the order of dispossession also refused to strike out these costs. At any rate we think the plaintiff overlooks the effect of section 2260, above cited. She urges tbat section 2263 is the only section authorizing costs, and tbat is in case of restitution ordered.

Like many other questions upon tbe construction of several sections of tbe Code, the question may not be free from doubt. But analogy favors tbe construction taken by tbe county judge and we are of tbe opinion tbat he was corrects

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and printing disbursements.

Present — Learned, P. J., Bockes and Landon, JJ.

So ordered.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

October 31, 2014

d1028 

# Order

Clerk October 31, 2014

149551

SHAND L AW PLLC,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 149551

COA: 319697

Washtenaw CC: 13

- 000699

- AV

MIN DONG,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 19, 2014 order

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not per suaded

that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

M ARKMAN

, J. ( concurring ).

I concur in the majority’s order denying leave to appeal. I write separately only to

observe that when an attorney’s representation under a contingency

- fee agreement is

terminated before completion of the contracted

- for services, “the attorney is entitled to

compensation for the reasonable value of his services on the basis of quantum meruit, and

not on the basis of the contract, provided that his discharge was wrongful or his

withdrawal was for good cause.” Plunkett & Cooney, PC v Capitol Bancorp, Ltd , 2 12

Mich App 325, 329

- 330 (1995). Notwithstanding what I view as the trial court’s

misapplication of this rule, the practical consequences here are slight and further

proceedings would require an expenditure of judicial resources that is difficult to justi fy

.
#### HAROLD HAUGAARD, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. O. HENRY GROIS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. EDGAR MALIN, BY HIS NEXT FRIEND, FRIEDA MALIN, AND FRIEDA MALIN, INDIVIDUALLY, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. O. HENRY GROIS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Submitted October term, 1932

Decided April 28, 1933.

Before Justices Trenchard, Case and Brosan.

Eor the plaintiffs-respondents, *Green & Green (Herbert J. Kenarih,*of counsel).

Eor the defendant-appellant, *Blanchard & Garey {Robert Carey, Jr.,*of counsel).

Per Curiam.

These cases grow out of an automobile collision between an automobile owned and operated by Harold Haugaard in which Edgar Malin was a passenger and an automobile owned and operated by the defendant Grois. The cases were tried together before the judge, sitting without a jury, and resulted in verdicts for the two named plaintiffs. Defendant appeals, and the appeals are considered together.

Appellant’s first point is that “the testimony before the District Court left only one conclusion, viz., that the *340plaintiff-appellee, Harold Haugaard, was guilty of contributory negligence.” There was testimony from which it could be found that Haugaard, in driving his automobile along Beardsley avenue approaching the intersection with Sixteenth street, made an observation to his left at a distance of ten feet from the intersection and made a second observation to his left before entering upon the intersection and saw no car approaching; that he proceeded and had traveled three-quarters of the way across the intersection when his attention was drawn to defendant’s car, coming from Haugaard’s left, by the screeching of the brakes thereof; that Haugaard thereupon braked his car to a standstill and while stationary was struck by the defendant’s car, and that the latter car dragged the Haugaard car for a distance and, proceeding onward, mounted the sidewalk and hit a telegraph pole on Sixteenth street about seven feet from Beardsley avenue. We are unable to say that these facts demonstrate contributory negligence on the part of Haugaard as a matter of law. The question was factual and was decided, as it might lawfully be, against the defendant.

Appellant’s second and remaining point is that “the negligence of the plaintiff, Harold Haugaard, should have been' imputed to the plaintiff Edgar Malin and so barred the suit brought by Edgar "Malin by his next friend, Erieda Malin, and Erieda Malin individually.” On the Malin case also the question of contributory negligence by Haugaard was factual and Malin cannot be charged with contributory negligence by Haugaard inasmuch as Haugaard was found not to be guilty thereof.

The judgment below will be affirmed.
1210-AB32-2-1145.html[7/24/2015 6:36:45 PM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 09, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jvq-zb5o

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; Notice of

 proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1639

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: Ryan Ritchie

General Comment

Im smart enough to plan for my own retirement!
AUTHORIZATION PLAN

I. Legislative Needs

A. Item - The following addition and modification to Washington's

Hazardous Waste Disposal Act Chapter 70.107 RCW will be developed

and pursued:

1. Modification of rCW 70.105.090 - Violations to be consistent

with the requirements of the Resource Conservation and

Recovery Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-580).

B. Possible Problems - The department does not foresee any problems

in amending the existing law under Item 1, however, there is always

the possibility that the legislature would not concur with the

proposed legislation.

C. Schedule - We are currently drafting changes to RCW 70.105 and will

submit them at the start of the 1983 session.

II. Regulatory Needs

A. Items - The following additions and modifications to the Dangerous

Waste Regulations Chapter 173-303 WAC will be developed and pursued:

1. The state regulations will need to be amended to reflect final

land disposal standards promulgated by EPA.

2. ·Modifications to the regulation may need to be made from time to

time as the Federal program requirements change.

~. Possible Problems - The department does not foresee any major

obstacles in modifying or amending the Dangerous Waste Regulation

as long as the changes are consistent with state law Chapter 70.105

RCW, the Hazardous Waste Disposal Act.

Item 2 will be more difficult to estimate depending upon the specific

language and interpretation that the USEPA uses. If any problems do

occur the department will contact EPA Region X immediately.

C. Schedule - We will be drafting amendments as soon as EPA regulations

are adopted. Adoption proceeding will begin as soon as possible.

III. Administrative Needs

A. Item - Possible difference on how EPA and the State of Washington

would regulate the handling of radioactive waste.

B. Possible Problems and Alternatives - EPA currently regulates all

other radioactive waste not excluded under 40 CPR 261.4(a)(4).
State Law Chapter 70.105 RCW, the Hazardous Waste Disposal Act,

specifically states the limits of the Act to non-radioactive wastes.

Therefore, the Department of Ecology has no authority over radioactive materials. However, the Washington State Department of

Social and Health Services does regulate radioactive waste under

state law Chapter 70.98 RCW. Under Title 402, Chapters 19, 21, and

22 WAC, DSHS also sets forth the licensing procedures for generators

of radioactive waste. These regulations set forth the requirements

for waste disposal.

In conversation with DSHS coordinators, there are no differences

in how EPA and DSHS regulate radioactive waste. However, as

changes to EPA regulations and DSHS regulations occur, any

differences will need to be resolved.

C. Schedule - ongoing.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                           9
<MULTIPLIER>                                    1,000                         
       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                            534
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          5,824
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                    0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                    0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     6,075
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          6,951
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            6,692
<LOANS>                                        38,384
<ALLOWANCE>                                      (304)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 52,515
<DEPOSITS>                                     40,026
<SHORT-TERM>                                        0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                               734
<LONG-TERM>                                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                           77
<OTHER-SE>                                     11,678
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 52,515
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 1,572
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                 212
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   60
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                1,844
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              1,002
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  0
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                             839
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                   470
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   445
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                        445
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                      284
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     .40
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .40
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                   3.02
<LOANS-NON>                                       445
<LOANS-PAST>                                      445
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                    0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                     0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                  304
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       0
<RECOVERIES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                 304
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                              304
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                             0
        


</TABLE>