alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
July 7 , 2015

Mr s . Pat Carvelli

18 Shady View Crossing

Manorville, NY 11949

Dear Mr s . Carvelli:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process your

request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can No t Process Your Request

We entered your April 9 , exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA

- 20 15

- 0950 ), but

we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does no t comply

with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further,

you must send us all of the following:

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, h ow it would

benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would no t adversely affect safety or how the exemption

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you

seek an exemption.

 Any additional i nformation, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.2

If We Do No t Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you

further. If you have any ques tions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267

- 9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brenda Robeson

Program Analyst , Airmen and

Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 210 (Thursday, October 30, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 58728]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28698]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket Nos. RP97-71-000; and RP97-312-000]


Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation; Notice of Informal 
Settlement Conference

October 24, 1997.
    Take notice that an informal settlement conference will be convened 
in this proceeding on Thursday, October 30, 1997, at 10:00 a.m., at the 
offices of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, 
N.E., Washington, DC, for the purpose of exploring the possible 
settlement of the above-referenced dockets. If necessary, the 
conference will continue to Friday, October 31, 1997.
    Any party, as defined by 18 CFR 385.102(c), or any participant, as 
defined by 18 CFR 385.102(b), is invited to attend. Persons wishing to 
become a party must move to intervene and receive intervenor status 
pursuant to the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 385.214).
    For additional information, contact David R. Cain at (202) 208-
0917, Donald A. Heydt at (202) 208-0740 or Paul B. Mohler at (202) 208-
1240.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary,
[FR Doc. 97-28698 Filed 10-29-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 210 (Thursday, October 30, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 58760]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28836]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Great Northern Finance Corporation; Order of Suspension of 
Trading

[File No. 500-1]
October 27, 1997.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is 
a lack of adequate and accurate current information concerning the 
securities of Great Northern Finance Corporation (``GNFL''), of Denver, 
Colorado. Questions have been raised about publicly-disseminated 
information concerning, among other things: (1) arrangements, 
understandings or agreements to artificially control the market for 
GNFL's securities; (2) the ownership of GNFL's securities; (3) the 
status of a proposed acquisition of Lazer-Tek Designs, Inc. by GNFL; 
(4) the business prospects of Lazer-Tek; and (5) the business prospects 
of GNFL.
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the 
protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the 
securities of the above listed company.
    Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the 
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the above listed 
company is suspended for the period from 9:00 a.m. EST, October 27, 
1997 through 11:59 p.m. EST, on November 7, 1997.

    By the Commission.
Margaret H. McFarland,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-28836 Filed 10-27-97; 4:36 pm]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-M
```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 210 (Thursday, October 30, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 58755]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28799]

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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Advisory Committee for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences; 
Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting.

    Name: Advisory Committee for Social, Behavioral, and Economic 
Sciences (1171).
    Date & Time: November 17, 1997; 9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.; November 
18, 1997; 9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.
    Place: NSF, Room 375, NSF, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, Va. 
22230.
    Type of Meeting: Open.
    Contact Person: Ms. Catherine J. Hines, Executive Secretary; 
Directorate for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences, NSF, 
Suite 905; 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, Va. 22230. Telephone: (703) 
306-1741.
    Minutes: May be obtained from the contact person listed above.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and recommendations to the 
National Science Foundation on major goals and policies pertaining 
to SBE programs and activities.
    Agenda: Discussions on issues, role and future direction of the 
NSF Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences.

    Dated: October 27, 1997.
M. Rebecca Winkler,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 97-28799 Filed 10-29-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
```
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3747 

To allow individuals with disabilities to campaign for elected office without 

losing access to federally supported benefits. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 7, 2024 

Mr. CASEY (for himself, Ms. KLOBUCHAR, Mrs. GILLIBRAND, Mr. PADILLA, 

Mr. WELCH, Mr. VAN HOLLEN, Mr. MARKEY, Mr. SANDERS, Mr. 

MERKLEY, Mr. WHITEHOUSE, Mr. FETTERMAN, Ms. HIRONO, Mr. 

BLUMENTHAL, Ms. DUCKWORTH, Mr. BOOKER, and Mr. WYDEN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To allow individuals with disabilities to campaign for elected 

office without losing access to federally supported benefits. 

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 ‘‘Removing Access Bar5 riers to Running for Elected Office for People with Dis6 abilities Act’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3747 IS

1 SEC. 2. DISREGARDING CAMPAIGN WORK PERFORMED BY 

2 INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES FOR PUR3 POSES OF FEDERALLY SUPPORTED BENE4 FITS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Any campaign work performed by 

6 a qualified individual, and any compensation received by 

7 such individual for such work, shall be disregarded for the 

8 purpose of determining such individual’s eligibility for, 

9 and amount of, benefits or assistance under any Federal 

10 program or under any State or local program financed in 

11 whole or in part with Federal funds. 

12 (b) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

13 (1) CAMPAIGN WORK.—The term ‘‘campaign 

14 work’’ means work performed by an individual as a 

15 candidate for an elected Federal, State, or local of16 fice. 

17 (2) QUALIFIED INDIVIDUAL.—The term ‘‘quali18 fied individual’’ means an individual who is entitled 

19 to a benefit under title II or XVI of the Social Secu20 rity Act (42 U.S.C. 401 et seq., 1381 et seq.) by 

21 reason of a disability. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
#### ADVANCE CO. v. ALBERT.

No. 38255.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. So.2d 474. 216
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 210 (Thursday, October 30, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 58744]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28710]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management
[ID-933-1430-01; IDI-15468]


Public Land Order No. 7294; Revocation of Secretarial Order Dated 
February 18, 1909; Idaho

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Public Land Order.

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

SUMMARY: This order revokes in its entirety a Secretarial order which 
withdrew 74.38 acres of National Forest System land for the Forest 
Service's Gorge Ranger Station. The land is no longer needed for the 
purpose for which it was withdrawn. This revocation is needed to 
transfer a portion of the land by sale under the Small Tract Act. This 
action will open the land to surface entry and mining. All of the land 
has been and will remain open to mineral leasing.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 1, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry R. Lievsay, BLM Idaho State 
Office, 1387 S. Vinnell Way, Boise, Idaho 83709, 208-373-3864.
    By virtue of the authority vested in the Secretary of the Interior 
by Section 204 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, 
43 U.S.C. 1714 (1994), it is ordered as follows:
    1. The Secretarial Order dated February 18, 1909, which withdrew 
National Forest System land for administrative site purposes, is hereby 
revoked in its entirety:

Boise Meridian

T. 54 N., R. 3 E.,
    Sec. 4, lots 3 and 4.

    The area described contains 74.38 acres in Bonner County.

    2. At 9:00 a.m. on December 1, 1997, the land shall be opened to 
such forms of disposition as may by law be made of National Forest 
System land, including location and entry under the United States 
mining laws, subject to valid rights, the provisions of existing 
withdrawals, other segregations or record, and the requirements of 
applicable law. Appropriation of land described in this order under the 
general mining laws prior to the date and time of restoration is 
unauthorized. Any such attempted appropriation, including attempted 
adverse possession under 30 U.S.C. 38 (1994), shall vest no rights 
against the United States. Acts required to establish a location and to 
initiate a right of possession are governed by State law where not in 
conflict with Federal law. The Bureau of Land Management will not 
intervene in disputes between rival locators over possessory rights 
since Congress has provided for such determinations in local courts.

    Dated: October 21, 1997.
Bob Armstrong,
Assistant Secretary of the Interior.
[FR Doc. 97-28710 Filed 10-29-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-GG-P
No. 9691.

#### Keister *v.*City of Akron.

(Decided November 20, 1906.)

Error to Circuit Court of Summit County.

*Mr. I. H. Phelps*and *Messrs. Tibbals & Frank,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. Clyde F. Beery*and *Mr. S. D. Kenfield,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Crew, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.
fill j JU)' H-l v:(/)mf/l ' 

Street Address:
 

950 West Basin Road
 

New Cos"e, DE 19720
 

Mailing Address: 

P.O. Box 15505
 

Wilmington, DE 19850
 

(302) 324-2500
 

(8001 235-9100
 

Fax Numbers:
 

Accoun~ng: 324-2554
 

Circula~on: 324-2945
 

Classi~ed: 324-5511
 

t-I..nm Res<:uo!s: 324-2578
 

Info Systems: 324-2969
 

Marketing: 324-2557
 

News: 324-5509
 

Retail: 324-5518
 

~:.~~~~~~.
 Legal Desk 302-324-2676
 

Legal Fax 302-324-2249
 

AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
 

State of Delaware 

Personally appeared before me this 22"d day of December, 2010. 

I, Kristin Segner, of The News Journal Company, a daily newspaper printed and published 

in the County of New Castle County, State of Delaware, who, being dUly sworn states that 

the advertisement of SID DNREC Division of Air Quality - Legal Notice Public Hearing 

was published in The News Journal on December 22, 2010 

Legal Coordinator 

Name Title 

Sworn to before me this 22"d day of December, 2010 

Wanda James 

Notary Public Notary Public State of Delaware 

, "-,,,,:;sion expires 11/0212012
<PAGE>



                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.8

                          China World Trade Corporation

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

                              SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

This Agreement dated 9 September, 2002 entered into between and by:

PARTY A: China World Trade Corporation of 4th Floor, Goldlion Digital Network
         Center, 138 Tiyu Road East, Tianhe, Guangzhou, the PRC 510620

PARTY B: Simple Fortune Inc., c/o Suites 1201-4, Tower Two, The Gateway, 25-27
         Canton Road, Tsimshatsui, Hong Kong

                                    RECITALS

         Party A is a public company with business provided in the major areas
of business recreational club, online trading services, and trading brokerage
and agency services; and Party A owed Party B a total amount of US$230,000 (the
"Consideration Amount") resulting of the debt assignment from Yes Mind
Investment Limited.

WHEREAS:

1.       Party B agrees to convert the Consideration Amount that Party A owned
         into the shares of the common stock of Party A which shall rank
         pari-passu to the existing common stock; and Party A agrees to issue or
         cause to issue a total of 490,000 POST 30-TO-1 REVERSE SPLIT SHARES of
         its common stock to Party B for the settlement of the Consideration
         Amount (the "Transaction").

2.       Party A agrees to pay for all the expenses in relation to the issuance
         of its shares of common stock to Party B.

3.       Upon signing of this Agreement and the completion of the issuance of
         shares of the common stock of Party A to Party B, neither Party A nor
         Party B would claim the counter party for any form of additional damage
         and/or settlement regarding the Consideration Amount.

4.       Both parties agree to keep all information regarding the Transaction
         and its business or affairs which are known to the Parties in
         connection with this Agreement strictly confidential and shall release
         such information only to parties authorized by either party.

5.       This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the Hong Kong Special
         Administrative Region and the Parties shall submit to the jurisdiction
         thereof.

For and on behalf of                    For and on behalf of
Party A                                 Party B

/s/ John Hui                            /s/ Authorized Signature
----------------------------------      ----------------------------------
Mr. John HUI                            For and on behalf of SIMPLE FORTUNE
                                        INC. Authorized Signature(s)
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-6211

TITO F. HARRIS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

WARDEN LIEBER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. 

Timothy M. Cain, District Judge. (4:20-cv-00906-TMC)

Submitted: July 20, 2021 Decided: July 23, 2021

Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tito F. Harris, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Tito F. Harris seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the 

recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Harris’ 28 U.S.C. § 2254 

petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of 

appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A). A certificate of appealability will not issue 

absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(2). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this 

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists could find the district court’s assessment 

of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong. See Buck v. Davis, 137 S. Ct. 759, 773-74 

(2017). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must 

demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable and that the petition 

states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 

134, 140-41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)). 

Limiting our review to the issues raised in the informal brief, we conclude that 

Harris has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of 

appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts 

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
#### Dwaine Edmond WOODS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Abbie Gayle Crump WOODS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 13457.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit.

Oct. 31, 1977.

*870Clyde Lain, II, Monroe, for defendant-appellant.

James Sharp, Jr., Monroe, for plaintiff-appellee.

Before BOLIN, PRICE, HALL, MARVIN and JONES, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Judgment of annulment was signed on June 27, 1977. Following the denial of application for a new trial on July 25, 1977, defendant filed a motion for appeal on August 18,1977. Appellant did not furnish an appeal bond until August 25, 1977, which was *not*timely. LSA-C.C.P. Art. 3942.

Appellant was notified of our probable lack of jurisdiction and did not respond to our order to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed.

At appellant’s cost, the appeal is DISMISSED.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v.

FRANCIS R. CASILDO,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 19

- 30240

D.C. No. 4:18

- cr

- 00175

- BLW

- 2

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Idaho

B. Lynn Winmill, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 20, 2021 * *

Before: McKEOWN , CALLAHAN, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.

Francis R. Casildo appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges

the 235

- month sentence imposed following his jury

- trial conviction for possession

with intent to distribute methamphetamine and conspirac y to distribute a controlled

substance

, in violation of 21 U.S.C § § 841(a)(1) , (b)(1)(B), (C) and 846. We have

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

JAN 29 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 19

- 30240

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Casildo contends that the district court abused its discretion by plac ing

undue weight on the need for deterrence to the exclusion of the other 18 U.S.C.

§ 3553(a) sentencing factors . The district court did not abuse its discretion. See

Gall v. United States , 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The below

- Guidelines sentence is

substantively reasonable in light of the § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality

of the circumstances , including the need to protect the public and the seriousness

of the offense

. See Gall , 552 U.S. at 51 ; see also United States v. Gutierrez

Sanchez , 587 F.3d 904, 908 (9th Cir. 2009) (“The weight to be given the various

factors in a particular case is for the discretion of the district court.”). Moreover,

contrary to Casildo’s contention, the record reflec ts that the district court

considered all of the § 3553(a) factors and thoroughly explained its decision to

impose the 235

- month sentence. See United States v. Carty , 520 F.3d 984, 992

(9th Cir. 2008) (en banc) (“T he district court need not tick off each of the

§ 3553(a) factors to show that it has considered them. ”).

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 32.2 – CFO
Certification








ROYAL INVEST INTERNATIONAL
CORP.





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350,


AS ADDED BY


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002








In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Royal Invest
International Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"), I, Nathan Lapkin, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss. 1350, as added by ss. 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 results of operations of the Company as of and for
the period covered by the Report.





By: /s/ Nathan
Lapkin


Nathan
Lapkin


Chief
Financial Officer





November
19, 2008





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 ("Section 906"), or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or
otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the
electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been
provided to Royal Invest International Corp., and will be retained by Royal
Invest International Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
Item 77C  DWS RREEF Real Estate Fund II, Inc.

Registrant incorporates by
 reference to its Proxy Statement
filed on April 7, 2009 (SEC
Accession No. 0000950123-09-006162).
A Special Meeting of Stockholders of
 DWS RREEF Real Estate Fund, Inc. (the "Fund")
was held on May 20, 2009 at the New
 York Marriott East Side,
525 Lexington Avenue,
New York, New York 10017.
The following matter was
voted upon by the Stockholders
of the Fund (the resulting
 votes are presented below).
1. The approval of the
liquidation and dissolution
of DWS RREEF Real Estate Fund II,
Inc. pursuant to a plan of
 Liquidation and Dissolution:

Number of Votes:
For
Against
Abstain
13,292,347
6,568,678
568,768

The proposal to liquidate the Fund
was not approved since the
affirmative vote did not
constitute a majority of the Fund's
 outstanding common stock
 and preferred stock.
Therefore, the Fund will
continue to exist as a
closed-end registered investment
company in accordance with its
stated investment objective and policies.