alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
POWER OF ATTORNEY
 FOR
 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 AND RELATED FILINGS
 
 ___________________________________
 
 EachoftheundersignedDirectors ofFIRSTHAND TECHNOLOGY VALUE FUND, INC. (the “Fund”) hereby appoints KEVIN LANDIS and OMAR BILLAWALA hisattorneys-in-factandagents,in allcapacities,toexecuteand to file any documentsrelating to the RegistrationStatements on Form N-2 under theInvestmentCompany Act of 1940,under theSecuritiesAct of 1933 of the Fund and under the laws of the states and otherjurisdictions,including any and all amendments thereto,covering the registration and the sale of shares by the Fund,includingallexhibits and any and alldocumentsrequired to be filed with respect thereto with any regulatory authority, including proxy statements, 10-Ks, and applications for exemptive orders or rulings.Each of the undersigned grants to each of said attorneysfullauthorityto doeveryactnecessaryto be done in order to effectuate the same as fully, to all intents and purposes, as he could do if personallypresent,thereby ratifying all that saidattorney-in-facts and agents may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.
 
 TheundersignedDirectorsherebyexecute this Power of Attorney as of this 20th day of March, 2012.
 
 /s/ Greg Burglin
 Greg Burglin
 
 /s/ Rodney Yee
 Rodney Yee
 
 /s/ Kimun Lee
 Kimun Lee
IB 

Union Calendar No. 688 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8931 

[Report No. 118–843] 

To redesignate Saratoga National Historical Park as Saratoga National 

Battlefield Park. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 2, 2024 

Ms. STEFANIK (for herself and Mr. TONKO) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

DECEMBER 10, 2024 

Additional sponsors: Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN and Mr. LAWLER

DECEMBER 10, 2024 

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 

and ordered to be printed 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 8931 RH

A BILL 

To redesignate Saratoga National Historical Park as 

Saratoga National Battlefield Park. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•HR 8931 RH

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SARATOGA NATIONAL BATTLEFIELD PARK. 

4 (a) REDESIGNATION.—Saratoga National Historical 

5 Park shall hereafter be known and designated as ‘‘Sara6 toga National Battlefield Park’’. 

7 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg8 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

9 States to Saratoga National Historical Park shall be 

10 deemed to be a reference to Saratoga National Battlefield 

11 Park. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
Union Calendar No. 688 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8931 

[Report No. 118–843] 

A BILL 

To redesignate Saratoga National Historical Park 

as Saratoga National Battlefield Park. 

DECEMBER 10, 2024 

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 

State of the Union and ordered to be printed 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
### SERVED: APRIL 3, 2015 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

InThe Matter Of: PRO FORM PRODUCTS LTD. Respondent 

### WASHINGTON, DC ) ) ) ) ) DocketNo. FAA-2014-1122 Case No. 2011S0700264



### ORDERDISMISSING PROCEEDING OnApril2, 2015, the Respondent filed its Motion to Withdraw Request for Hearing and Answer "forthe reasonthat Respondent has executed a Settlement Agreement with Federal Aviation Administration
... that settles all issues in this matter." After having reviewedthe case file, all pleadings and motions, all relevant caselaw, statutes, regulations, rules, and authority, and being fully advised; 

### IT IS HEREBYORDERED: 1. Pursuantto 14 C.F.R. 

### § 13.215, the Respondent has withdrawn its Request for Hearing and Answer, and this proceeding is dismissed withprejudice. ·

Attachment: Service List; ';



### 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-Suite2WI000 1

Mr. Robert B. Dixon Complainant's Counsel Federal Aviation Administration Office ofthe Regional Counsel, AS0-7 SouthernRegion 1701 ColumbiaAvenue College Park, GA 30337 TEL: 404-305-5200 FAJ(: 404-305-5223 ONE COPY

President DocketNo. FAA-2014-1122 (Civil Penalty Action)

Mr. Stuart A. Laven, Jr. Respondent's Counsel Cavitch, Farnilo & Durkin TwentiethFloor Pro Form Products, Ltd., Respondent 604 McGeachie Drive · 1300 EastNinth Street Cleveland, OH 44114 TEL: 216-621-7860 FAJ(: 216-621-3415 E-MAIL: slaven@cavitch.com Judge J.E. Sullivan U.S. Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-6941 FAJ(: 202-366-7536 Milton, Ontario Canada L9T3Y5

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite2Wl000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: HearingDocket Clerk, AGC-430.
Exhibit 4.1

                               ARS NETWORKS, INC.

         The undersigned  hereby agrees that for a period commencing on the date
hereof and expiring on the  termination  of the Equity Line of Credit  Agreement
dated March ___, 2001,  between ARS Networks,  Inc., (the "Company") and Cornell
Capital Partners,  L.P., (the "Investor") (the "Lock-up Period"),  he, she or it
will not,  directly  or  indirectly,  without the prior  written  consent of the
Investor,  issue,  offer,  agree or offer to sell, sell, grant an option for the
purchase  or sale of,  transfer,  pledge,  assign,  hypothecate,  distribute  or
otherwise  encumber  or dispose of except  pursuant  to Rule 144 of the  General
Rules and  Regulations  under the  Securities Act of 1933, any securities of the
Company, including common stock or options, rights, warrants or other securities
underlying,  convertible into, exchangeable or exercisable for or evidencing any
right to purchase or subscribe for any common stock (whether or not beneficially
owned by the undersigned), or any beneficial interest therein (collectively, the
"Securities").

         In  order  to  enable  the  aforesaid  covenants  to be  enforced,  the
undersigned  hereby  consents  to the  placing of legends  and/or  stop-transfer
orders with the transfer agent of the Company's  securities  with respect to any
of the  Securities  registered in the name of the  undersigned  or  beneficially
owned by the undersigned,  and the undersigned hereby confirms the undersigned's
investment in the Company.

Dated: _______________, 2001.

                                    Signature

                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    Name:  Sydney Harland
                                    Address:
                                            ------------------------------------

                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    City, State, Zip Code:
                                                          ----------------------

                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    Print Social Security Number or Taxpayer
                                    I.D. Number
(Reap. Dec. 10530)

#### Unit Venetian Blind Supply Corp. (Wiley) *v.*United States

Entry No. 5823, etc.

(Decided June 6, 1963)

*Lawrence & Tuttle*for the plaintiff.

*John W. Douglas,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

OliveR, Chief Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement enumerated in schedule “A,” hereto attached and made a part hereof, are before me for decision on a written stipulation reading as follows:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the attorneys for the parties hereto:

> 1. That all of the merchandise covered by the appeals for reappraisement set forth in Schedule “A” hereto attached and made a part hereof was withdrawn from Customs warehouse for consumption before the effective date of the Customs Simplification Act of 1956 and was therefore appraised under Section 402, Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Administrative Act of 1938.

> 2. That no foreign value, as defined by Section 402(e), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Administrative Act of 1938, existed for such or similar merchandise.

> 3. That as to the merchandise shipped by Rikuno Seiren Company from Japan, at the time of exportation to the United States, the prices at which such or similar merchandise was freely sold or offered for sale in the principal markets of Japan, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, were the unit invoice values, net packed, or plus packing where packing is listed separately on the invoices as not being included in the unit invoice values.

> 4. That, with regard to the remaining merchandise covered by these appeals for reappraisement, at the time of exportation to the United States, the prices at which such or similar merchandise was freely sold or offered for sale in the principal markets of Japan, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, were the appraised unit values less any buying commission noted on the invoices and included in the appraised unit values.

> *4925. That the appeals for reappraisement set forth in Schedule “A,” are submitted on this stipulation.

On the agreed facts, I find that the proper basis for appraisement of the merchandise in question is export value, as defined in section 402(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, and hold that such value therefor is as follows:

1. Statutory export value of merchandise shipped by Rikuno Seiren Company from Japan is the unit invoice values, net, packed, or plus packing where packing is listed separately on the invoices as not being included in the unit invoice values.

2. Statutory export value for all other merchandise included in the shipments covered by the entries involved in these appeals for reappraisement is the appraised unit values, less any buying commission noted on the invoices and included in the appraised unit values.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Aeolus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended June 30, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the Report), I, James D. Crapo, M.D., Chief Executive Officer, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



| | (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 results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/S/ JAMES D. CRAPOJames D. Crapo, M.D.Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)August 11, 2004
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8919 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8919

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 151 Highway 74 South in Peachtree City, Georgia, as the ``SFC Shawn 
                        McCloskey Post Office''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              July 2, 2024

Mr. Ferguson (for himself, Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia, Mr. Loudermilk, 
Mr. Clyde, Ms. Greene of Georgia, Mr. Collins, Mr. Allen, Mr. Carter of 
 Georgia, Mr. McCormick, Mrs. McBath, Mr. David Scott of Georgia, Mr. 
Johnson of Georgia, Mr. Bishop of Georgia, and Ms. Williams of Georgia) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                      Oversight and Accountability

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 151 Highway 74 South in Peachtree City, Georgia, as the ``SFC Shawn 
                        McCloskey Post Office''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SFC SHAWN MCCLOSKEY POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 151 Highway 74 South in Peachtree City, Georgia, shall be 
known and designated as the ``SFC Shawn McCloskey Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``SFC Shawn 
McCloskey Post Office''.
                                 <all>
```
#### Benjamin Cowen, *Appellant, v.*The Onondaga Iron Company, Respondent.

Judgment affirmed.
#### Hale Bros. Stores, Inc. *v.*United States

No. 7331.

Invoice dated London, England, June 4, 1946.

Certified June 4, 1946.

Entered at San Francisco, Calif., July 24, 1946.

Entry No. 330.

*213(Decided July 11, 1947)

*Lawrence, Tuttle & Harper (Frank L. Lawrence*of counsel) for tlie plaintiff.

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

Oliver, Presiding Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has 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 importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
(Reap. Dec. 8490)

#### Trapac Corporation *v.*United States

Entry No. 63371.

(Decided October 21, 1955)

*Shareüs, Paley & Carter*for the plaintiff.

*Warren E. Burger,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

•Ford, Judge:

The appeal listed above has been submitted for decision upon a stipulation to the effect that the market value or the price of the involved merchandise at the time of exportation of such merchandise to the United States, at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of Japan, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, including all costs and charges specified in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, was $3.13% per dozen net packed for the white scarves and $3.16% per dozen net packed for the colored scarves, and that there was no higher foreign value for such or similar merchandise.

Accepting this stipulation as a statement of fact, I find the proper export value for the white scarves to be $3.13% per dozen net packed and $3.16% per dozen net packed for the colored scaiwes. Judgment will be entered accordingly.
Prepared by MERRILL CORPORATION




Exhibit 10(a)  


April 19, 2001 


Board
of Directors

Protective Life Insurance Company

2801 Highway 201 South

Birmingham, Alabama 35223 


Directors:



    We
hereby consent to the reference to our name under the caption "Legal Matters" in the statement of additional information filed as part of post-effective amendment number 5
to the registration statement on Form N-4 (File No. 333-68551) filed by Protective Life Insurance Company and Protective Variable Annuity Separate Account with the Securities and
Exchange Commission. In giving this consent, we do not admit that we are in the category of persons whose consent is required under Section 7 of the Securities Act of 1933. 













Sincerely,

SUTHERLAND ASBILL & BRENNAN LLP

By: /s/ DAVID S. GOLDSTEIN  








David S. Goldstein
Case No. 14,543.

#### UNITED STATES v. BATES.

[2 Cranch, C. C. 405.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

April Term. 1823.

Witness — Interest— Criminal Prosecution — Trial — Right to Close.

1. A person who has given a receipt for goods to be delivered to other persons, is a competent witness for the United States, upon a prosecution against another person for stealing the goods.

TCited in U. S. v. Anderson, Case No. 14,452.]

2. In all criminal prosecutions the attorney for the United States upon the general issue, has a right to close the argument before the jury.

Indictment for stealing a box of books.

Mr. Handy was offered as a witness for the United States.

Air. Alorfit and Air. Ashton, for prisoner

[David Bates), objected that he was interested, as he had given a receipt for the books to B. French, stating them to be so many, more or less, to be delivered to sundry' persons. They compared it to the case of forgery, where the person whose name is forged is not permitted to testify; and to the case of usury, where the debtor is not a competent witness until he has paid the debt.

But THE COURT (nem. con.) -overruled the objection.

Air. Alorfit, after closing his argument to the jury, contended that the attorney for the United States should not be permitted to reply, inasmuch as the prisoner had not called any witness on his part, but relied on the defect of evidence on the part of the United States. King v. Lord Abingdon, 1 Esp. 227.

But

THE COURT

(nem. con.) said that, however the practice might be in England, in this court the attorney for the United *1042States has always had the right, in criminal prosecutions, to close the argument before the jury, upon the general issue.

Verdict, “Guilty.” Pardoned by the president of the United States.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA

July 12, 2024

SC-2024-0378

Ex parte Henry Beaty. PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO 

THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS (In re: Ex parte Henry Beaty (In 

re: State of Alabama v. Henry Beaty)) (Chambers Circuit Court: CC-11-

252; Criminal Appeals: CR-2024-0191).

CERTIFICATE OF JUDGMENT

WHEREAS, the petition for writ of certiorari in the above 

referenced cause has been duly submitted and considered by the 

Supreme Court of Alabama and the judgment indicated below was 

entered in this cause on July 12, 2024:

Writ Denied. No Opinion. Shaw, J. -- Parker, C.J., and Bryan, 

Mendheim, and Mitchell, JJ., concur.

NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to Rule 41, Ala. R. App. P., IT IS 

HEREBY ORDERED that this Court's judgment in this cause is certified 

on this date. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, unless otherwise ordered 

by this Court or agreed upon by the parties, the costs of this cause are 

hereby taxed as provided by Rule 35, Ala. R. App. P.

I, Megan B. Rhodebeck, certify that this is the record of the judgment of the Court, witness 

my hand and seal.

Clerk, Supreme Court of Alabama
| www.weather.gov  |
|-----------------------|

|  |  |   |  |
|--|--|--------|--|
|  |

|  | Site Map | News | Organization | Search 		 Search                   SWPC Home PageCurrent Conditions                   Alerts/Warnings                   Space Weather Now                   Today's Space Wx                   Data and Products                      Alerts &  Forecasts                     Reports/Summaries                     Space Wx Models                     Solar/Geo. Indices                     MeasurementsSupport Services                   About Us                   Staff                   Email Products                   Space Wx Workshop                   Education/Outreach                   Customer Services				   News & Media Info.Contact Us			   Contact Us               Webmaster               Feedback |
|--|----------|------|--------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 6028** 

GEORGE MUDD , Plaintiff

– Appellant ,
v. IRWIN W. FISH , Defendant

– Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virgin ia , at Roanoke
. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. ( 7:08

- cv - 00641

- jlk

- mfu )

Submitted : June 23, 2010 Decided: July 15, 2010

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and KEENAN , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. George Mudd, Ap pellant Pro Se. Sara Bugbee Winn, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: George Mudd appeals the district court’s order granting Defendant su mmary judgment on what it construed as an action brought pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics , 403 U.S. 388 (1971)
. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’ s order. See Mudd v. Fish , No. 7:08

- cv 00641

- jlk

- mfu (W.D. Va. Nov. 24, 2009). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional pro cess.
AFFIRMED
##                 The Army Lawyer 2024

Issue 1                The Army Lawyer 2023Issue 1Issue 2Issue 3                The Army Lawyer 2022Issue 1Issue 2Issue 3Issue 4                The Army Lawyer 2021Issue 6Issue 5Issue 4Issue 3Issue 2Issue 1                The Army Lawyer 2020Issue 6Issue 5Issue 4Issue 3Issue 2Issue 1                The Army Lawyer 2019Issue 6Issue 5Issue 4Issue 3Issue 2Issue 1                The Army Lawyer 2018November/December 2018September/October 2018July/August 2018            SEARCH THE ARMY LAWYER ARCHIVES (PDF ONLY)          The Army Lawyer Frequently Asked QuestionsTAL FAQsSubmissions
          The Army Lawyer is actively seeking article ideas, submissions, and          photos.        
            Submit Here          ******The Judge Advocate General's Legal Center & School
600 Massie Rd Charlottesville, VA 22903

Accessibility/Section 508FOIAExternal Links DisclaimerNo FEAR ActPrivacy Program
Contact Us- Main Reception Desk:
-  (434) 971-3300 
-  Lodging:  
-  (434) 972-6450 
-  ** 
School Departments-  Administrative & Civil Law 
-  Criminal Law 
-  Contract & Fiscal Law 
-  National Security Law 
-  Leadership 
-  Warrant Officer Education 
Legal Center-  Future Concepts Directorate 
-  Training Developments Directorate 
-  Center for Law and Military Operations 
NCOA & 27D AIT-  Resident NCOA 
-  Online Paralegal 
-  27D AIT