alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Agriculture

###### Natural Resources Conservation Service 

# AGENCY:

Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Department of Agriculture. 

# ACTION:

Notice of Availability of proposed changes in the Virginia NRCS State Technical Guide for review and comment. 

# SUMMARY:

It has been determined by the NRCS State Conservationist for Virginia that changes must be made in the NRCS State Technical Guide specifically in practice standards: #647, Early Successional Habitat Development Management, #511, Forage Harvest Management, #655, Forest Trails and Landings and #512, Pasture and Hay Planting. These practices will be used to plan and install conservation practices on cropland, pastureland, woodland, and wildlife land. 

# DATES:

Comments will be received for a 30-day period commencing with the date of this publication. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Inquire in writing to John A. Bricker, State Conservationist, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), 1606 Santa Rosa Road, Suite 209, Richmond, Virginia 23229-5014; Telephone number (804) 287-1691; Fax number (804) 287-1737. Copies of the practice standards will be made available upon written request to the address shown above or on the Virginia NRCS Web site:                         *http://www.va.nrcs.usda.gov/​technical/​draftstandards.html.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Section 343 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 states that revisions made after enactment of the law to NRCS State technical guides used to carry out highly erodible land and wetland provisions of the law shall be made available for public review and comment. For the next 30 days, the NRCS in Virginia will receive comments relative to the proposed changes. Following that period, a determination will be made by the NRCS in Virginia regarding disposition of those comments and a final determination of change will be made to the subject standards. 

Dated: March 26, 2007. 

John A. Bricker, 

State Conservationist, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Richmond, Virginia.

 [FR Doc. E7-5719 Filed 3-27-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410-16-P
#### Edward S. Sauter, *Respondent, v.*Josiah C. Hunt and another, Appellants.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
#### Gramaphone Shop, Inc. (Freedman & Slater, Inc.), et al. *v.*United States

No. 6641.

Entry No. 708320, etc.

Invoices dated London, England, August 10, 1942, etc.

Entered at New York, N. Y., October 7, 1942, etc.

(Decided December 18, 1946)

*Siegel, Mandell & Davidson*for the plaintiffs.

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Oliver, Presiding Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule A, hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

(Stipulation omitted.)

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such values are the appraised values, less the additions made by the importers on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
JACK KINGSTON 1st District, Georgia WASHINGTON OFFICE 2368 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC20515 (202) 225-5831 (202) 226-2269 FAX BRUNSWICK OFFICE Federal Building, Room 304 805Gloucester Street Brunswick, GA 31520 (912)265-9010 (912) 265-9013 FAX Committee On Appropriations Ranking Member, Agriculture Subcommittee Defense Subcommittee 

# Cogren ofthe 'United ~tatcs lAouue of `Repreuentatines

Lisa P . Jackson Administrator Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, DC 20460-3300 Dear Administrator Jackson, August 9, 2010 SAVANNAH OFFICE One Diamond Causeway, Suite 7

Savannah, GA 31406 (912) 352-0101 (912) 352-0105 FAX BAXLEY OFFICE P.O. Box 40 Baxley, GA 31515 (912)367-7403 (912) 367-7404 FAX VALDOSTA OFFICE Federal Building, Room218

P.O . Box 5264 Valdosta, GA 31603 (229) 247-9188 (229) 247-9189 FAX

I strongly oppose the EPA's current proposed rule EPA-HQ-RCRA-2008-0329 . This rule presents an insurmountable barrier to many in the renewable energy industry. In Georgia's First District, Appling County Pellets currently manufactures wood pellets to fuel residential pellet stoves as well as boilers across the United States. The company employs 45, people in Appling County and the surrounding areas. Appling County has suffered during the economic downturn and currently has an 11 .6 percent unemployment rate. This rule would threaten the viability ofAppling County Pellets. The "Alternative Approach" within the proposed rule classifies sawdust as solid waste. While the environmental community argues that any secondary material burned for energy should be classified as solid waste, this characterization is inaccurate. The process by which sawdust is made into wood pellets is a refined method. The sawdust is handled as a valuable and inimitable ingredient for the production of a traditional fuel source. The EPAshould recognize the value ofsawdust in the production process ofwood pellets. 

### As our nation struggles to recover fromthe current recession, I amdeeply concerned that the potential impact ofthis pending regulation. I urge the EPAto abandon this rule and others that threaten Americanjobs. Sincerely, Kingston ember of Congress
EXHIBIT 31.1CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 302 OFTHE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
I, Carlos Coe, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Global Energy Group,Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows ofthe registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:
 a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known tous by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, asof the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’sboard of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.
Date: September 29, 2004         /s/ Carlos Coe   Carlos Coe   Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT32.3

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF UCDPFINANCE, INC. PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

Inconnection with the quarterly report of Universal City DevelopmentPartners, Ltd. and UCDP Finance, Inc. (the"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period endingMarch 27, 2004 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert K.Gault, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|          |                                                                                                                     |
|----------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 1)  | the Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and |

|          |                                                                                                                                                    |
|----------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 2)  | the information containedin the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company. |

Dated:    May 5, 2004  By:   /s/ Robert K. GaultJr.                                 

|  | Robert K. Gault Jr. President (PrincipalExecutive Officer) |
|--|------------------------------------------------------------|

----
#### LONGRIDGE BUILDERS, INC., PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. PLANNING BOARD OF THE TOWNSHIP OF PRINCETON, ETC., *ET AL.,*DEFENDANTS-PETITIONERS.

See same case below: 98 *N. J. Super.*67.

*Mr. Gordon I). Griffin*and *Mr. Henry A. Hill, Jr.*for the petitioners.

*Messrs. McCarthy, Bacsik, Hicks & Dix*for the respondent.

January 16, 1968.

Granted.
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 10.17

                                  Amendment 3

                                Development Plan

      WHEREAS, the parties herein previously have entered into a Marketing and
Integration Agreement (the "Original Agreement") dated as of August 20, 1998 and
an Amendment No. 1 to the Original Agreement dated as of December 23, 1998
("Amendment No. 1," together with the Original Agreement, the "Agreement") and
an Amendment No. 2 to Amendment No. 1 dated January 23, 1999 ("Amendment No. 2,"
together with "Amendment NO. 1," together with the Original Agreement, the
"Agreement") which, among other things, sets forth the terms and conditions of a
joint effort by the parties to offer products to consumers via corporate
intranets and the internet; and

      WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of the Agreement the parties are obligated
to develop jointly a development plan detailing a technology and sales strategy
and budget regarding the joint offering of products;

      The parties met on Friday, February 19, 1999 in New York City, New York in
the offices of barnesandnoble.com. The parties representing RoweCom were Richard
Rowe, CEO and Louis Hernandez, Executive Vice President and CEO. The parties
representing barnesandnoble.com were Jonathan Bulkeley, CEO and Carl Rosendorf,
Vice President of Marketing and Sales.

      The meeting was concluded with an agreed upon plan and strategy going
forward as per the contract.

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Development Plan has been executed as of the day
and year first above written by the parties hereto.


            ROWECOM, INC.


            By: /s/ Louis Hernandez         Date: 3/99
                -----------------------           ---------------
                       Name:
                       Title:


            BARNESANDNOBLE.COM LLC


            By: /s/ Carl Rosendorf          Date: 3/3/99
                -----------------------           ---------------
                       Name:
                       Title:
#### Saul Freeman et al., Plaintiffs, v Diamond Chemical Co., Inc., et al., Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs-Respondents, and Independent Chemical Corp., Defendant and Third-Party Defendant-Respondent. Freeman’s Circle Valet, Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Appellant. (And Another Third-Party Action.)

[633 NYS2d 813]

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., based on negligence, strict liability, and breach of warranty, the third and fourth-party defendant Freeman’s Circle Valet, Inc., appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Coppola, J.), entered June 17, 1994, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the third and fourth-party complaints and all cross-claims insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

*414Freeman’s Circle Valet, Inc. (hereinafter Freeman’s Circle), is a dry cleaning business owned and operated by the injured plaintiff Saul Freeman and his brother Philip Freeman. On August 17, 1990, while the injured plaintiff was opening a container of ammonium hydroxide, some of the chemical splashed onto him, injuring him.

The defendant chemical companies commenced third and fourth-party actions against Freeman’s Circle, the injured plaintiff’s employer, alleging, *inter alia,*that it was negligent in failing to provide a safe place to work and in failing to provide proper storage for the chemicals in addition to alleging comparative negligence on the part of the injured plaintiff in the handling of the chemical.

Freeman’s Circle moved to dismiss these third and fourth-party complaints contending that the rules of apportionment did not allow such actions where the culpable conduct of the employee was the only wrong imputed to the corporation. The Supreme Court denied the motion.

The appellant, Freeman’s Circle, contends that its culpable conduct, if any, was the conduct of the injured plaintiff Saul Freeman, who was a principal and employee of the corporation and, as such, there was only one wrong committed. Therefore, a finding of fault as against it requiring it to indemnify or contribute to judgments against other parties should not be allowed. We disagree.

The Supreme Court correctly determined that there existed triable issues of fact as to whether Freeman’s Circle was separately negligent with respect to the allegedly improper storage of the ammonium hydroxide *(see, Stroschine v Prudential-Bache Sec.,*207 AD2d 828; *cf., Ruszkoivski v Sears, Roebuck & Co.,*188 AD2d 967). Balletta, J. P., Miller, O’Brien and Copertino, JJ., concur.
NO. 07-10-0367-CR

NO. 07-10-0368-CR

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL B

	OCTOBER 20, 2010

	______________________________

	CARLOS VIGIL,

		Appellant

	v.

	THE STATE OF TEXAS, 

		Appellee

________________________________

	FROM THE 251st DISTRICT COURT OF POTTER COUNTY;

	NOS. 57,173-C, 57,174-C; HON. ANA ESTEVEZ, PRESIDING

	_______________________________

***ON ABATEMENT AND REMAND***

	_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.

Appellant appeals from his convictions for indecency with a child.  Neither the clerk’s record nor the reporter’s records have been filed.  Counsel for appellant has filed a motion to withdraw, stating that he has not been employed to represent appellant in these appeals.  Counsel further states that appellant has filed an affidavit of indigence.

Accordingly, we abate these appeals and remand the causes to the 251st District Court of Potter County (trial court) for further proceedings.  Upon remand, the trial court shall determine, by reasonable evidentiary procedure it selects, the following:

1.  whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeals; 

    	2.  whether appellant is indigent; and, if so,

3.  whether the appellant is entitled to a free appellate record in each case and the appointment of an attorney due to his indigency. 

The trial court is also directed to enter such orders necessary to address the aforementioned questions.  So too shall it include its findings on those matters (including the name, address, and phone number of any attorney it may appoint to represent appellant in these appeals) in a supplemental record in each case and cause those records to be filed with this court by November 19, 2010.  Should further time be needed to perform these tasks, then same must be requested before November 19, 2010.  In the meantime, all other appellate deadlines and counsel’s motion to withdraw are stayed until further order of this court.

It is so ordered.

Per Curiam

Do not publish.

2
Motion Granted and Order filed February 28, 2017

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 16

- 01022

- CV

____________ IN THE INTEREST OF K .L., CHILD

On Appeal from the 257th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2015

- 37805



### ORDER

The clerk’s record was filed on February 9, 2017 . On February 14, 2017 , appellant, the State of Texas, filed a motion for this court to instruct the district clerk to file a legible version of the clerk’s record because many of the pages are illegible or difficult to read. According to the motion, another method for preparing the record exists that would produce clearer pages. The motion is GRANTED. Accordingly, we O RDER the Harris County District Clerk to prepare, certify, and file in this court a legible version of the complete clerk’s record at no additional cost to the parties. The new version of the clerk’s record must be filed by March 20, 2017

. PER CURIAM
FY2000 10K EX10.602






              EXHIBIT 10.602



                    Amendment No.2 to Licensing Agreement with
                                   World Channel, Inc.

 


Amendment No.2

to

Licensing Agreement

 

This Amendment No.2 to the Licensing Agreement that was signed between
the parties on December 27, 2000, is executed on March 28, 2001,

 

Between American Champion Media, Inc. (The Licensor)
22320 Foothill Blvd., Suite 260

Hayward, CA 94541




AndWorld Channel Inc. (The Licensee)
131 So. Maple Ave., Suite 6

So. San Francisco, CA 94080

 




WHEREBY IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED as follows:

 

Under Clause 2.:

 

That the grant of license and rights by the Licensor to the Licensee
according to the Licensing Agreement shall not include projects in the form of
motion pictures and the resulting video products of such motion
pictures.
License Period: shall be deleted and be replaced with following -


Five (5) years commencing on date of delivery of materials. Licensee has the
option to renew the Licensing Agreement for another five (5) year term at the
same terms and conditions as specified in the Licensing Agreement. 
All other clauses and terms shall remain unchanged.

 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have duly executed this Amendment No. 2
to the Agreement as of the day and year first above written by affixing their
signatures of their proper signing officers duly authorized on that behalf.

 


	
For and on behalf of

American Champion Media, Inc.

	
For and on behalf of

World Channel Inc.


	

By: /s/ Anthony K. Chan

Anthony K. Chan

Chief Executive Officer

	

By: /s/ Alan Mok

Alan Mok

President
EX-35.1
(logo)citi

1123 -Servicer Compliance Statement
Transactions Listed With SEC

I, Scott Tanguay, Senior Vice President of CitiMortgage, Inc., certify that:

(a) A review of CitiMortgage, Inc. (the "Servicer") activities during the 12
month period ending December 31, 2011 ("Reporting Period") and of its
performance under the applicable servicing agreement as identified on Schedule
A has been made under my supervision.

(b) To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has
fulfilled all of its obligations under the applicable servicing agreement in
all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

February 29, 2012


By:/s/Scott Tanguay
Name: Scott Tanguay
Title: Senior Vice President,CitiMortgage, Inc.
       Senior Officer in Charge of Servicing


(page)


Schedule A
Transactions Listed with SEC 2011
Deals in compliance



Investor/Bond Number     Security or Deal            Master Servicer or Trustee
                                                     or Investor

     77056               REDWOOD TRUST-WL 44         WELLS FARGO BANK - TRUSTEE
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This  schedule  contains  summary  financial  information  extracted  from  the
Statement  of  Financial  Condition  at  December  31, 1999 and the Statement of
Income  for  the  10  months  ended  December  31,  1999 and is qualified in its
entirety  by  reference  to  such  financial  statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                          FEB-16-1999
<PERIOD-END>                            DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          44
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    0
<ALLOWANCES>                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                      0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             10044
<PP&E>                                           0
<DEPRECIATION>                                   0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               10044
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            0
<BONDS>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<COMMON>                                      2000
<OTHER-SE>                                    8044
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 10044
<SALES>                                          0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 0
<CGS>                                            0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             52045
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (52045)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (52045)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                (52045)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0


</TABLE>
#### William C. Rencher, *Appellant, v.*Stephen B. Elkins, *Respondent.*

— Judgment reversed, new trial ordered, costs to abide event. Opinion by Daniels, J.