alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Petition of Raymond W. KLEIN, for Admission to The Florida Bar Examination.

No. 41930.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Feb. 16, 1972.

*145Joseph S. Conlin, Tallahassee, for petitioner.

Thomas T. Cobb, Daytona Beach, and C. Graham Carothers, Tallahassee, for Florida Bd. of Bar Examiners.

PER CURIAM.

The Florida Board of Bar Examiners has declined to accept petitioner/Colonel Raymond W. Klein’s application for admission to the Florida Bar examinations. Colonel Klein petitions here for relief under the theory that he is entitled to admission under Article IV, Section 22(b) and (c), Rules Relating to Admissions to The Bar, 32 F.S.A., because: (1) he graduated from a law school (John Marshall Law School) that received accreditation subsequent to his graduation; (2) he was admitted to the Illinois Bar in January 1950, and has been eligible to practice in that State ever since.

We agree with the Board’s rejection of petitioner’s application as it now stands. His graduation preceded accreditation by some 27 months, thus placing him far outside of the requirements of Article IV, Section 22(b) that accreditation occur either as of graduation or within the calendar year.

While petitioner was admitted to the Illinois Bar more than ten years ago, he entered the United States Air Force as a career officer shortly after his admission to that Bar. He was not assigned to the legal services division, and, therefore, would not normally be considered as having been in the practice of law. This is the position taken by the Board. However, we note that petitioner states that he was required, on numerous occasions, to act as defense attorney and also as judge in military courts during his Air Force career. Recently, in Diaz v. Florida Board of Bar Examiners, 252 So.2d 366 (Fla.1971), we indicated that demonstration of practice was a relatively flexible requirement. It is not designed to thwart an applicant, but rather to establish assurance of an applicant’s ability and capacity to function as a lawyer. For this reason, Section 22(c) (3), which governs this route to the Bar examination, states that in evaluating the work of an applicant, “[T]he Board is clothed with a broad discretion.”

The Board has not had an opportunity to evaluate the legal activities undertaken by petitioner in the Air Force because petitioner has failed to support his statements with any form of proof. Therefore, we would invite Colonel Klein to apply anew at a later date, when he can supply the Board with reasonably accurate details of the extent of his legal services, supported by appropriate documentation. The Board may then determine if these service experiences either constituted practice, or occurred with a frequency sufficient to justify an exception to the usual meaning of practice.

*146The petition is denied, but without prejudice for petitioner to proceed in the manner above indicated.

It is so ordered.

ROBERTS, C. J., and CARLTON, ADKINS, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
#### Charles F. KNAPP and Ethyle B. Knapp, his wife, Appellants, v. MIAMI MEMORIAL PARK, INC., and Miami Memorial Association, Appellees.

No. 71-66.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Aug. 31, 1971.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 20, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 124 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 124

 To amend the Rules of the House of Representatives to require secrecy 
oaths for Members, officers, and employees of the House before they may 
                 have access to classified information.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 10, 1993

Mr. Hyde submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 
                           Committee on Rules

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 To amend the Rules of the House of Representatives to require secrecy 
oaths for Members, officers, and employees of the House before they may 
                 have access to classified information.

    Resolved,

SECTION 1. OATH FOR MEMBERS, OFFICERS, AND EMPLOYEES OF THE HOUSE 
              BEFORE ACCESS TO CLASSIFIED INFORMATION.

    (a) Duties of the Speaker.--Rule I of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives is amended by adding at the end the following new 
clause:
    ``13.(a) The Speaker shall cause to be administered the following 
oath to any Member, officer, or employee of the House before that 
individual may have access to classified information:
            `I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will not directly 
        or indirectly disclose to any unauthorized person any 
        classified information received in the course of my service or 
        employment with the House of Representatives, except with the 
        formal approval of the House.'.
    ``(b) Any individual referred to in paragraph (a) who refuses to 
take this oath shall not have access to any classified information.''.
    (b) Duties of the Clerk.--Clause III of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives is amended by adding the following new clause:
    ``7. The Clerk shall cause the oaths set forth in clause 13 of rule 
I to be printed, furnishing two copies to each Member (or other 
individual) who has taken this oath, which shall be subscribed to by 
the Member (or other individual), who shall deliver them to the Clerk, 
one to be filed in the records of the House of Representatives, and the 
other to be recorded in the Journal of the House and in the 
Congressional Record.''.

                                 <all>
```
No. 00-925.

#### Barth *v.*Kaye, Chief Judge, Court of Appeals of New York, et al.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                     EXHIBIT 4.5


                               AMENDMENT TO BYLAWS
                                       OF
                                  AMSURG CORP.


         Article II, Section 2.2 of the Bylaws of AmSurg Corp. is hereby
modified and amended to state the following:


                  "Section 2.2 Special Meetings. A special meeting of
                  shareholders shall be held on call of the Board of Directors
                  or if the holders of at least fifteen percent (15%) of the
                  voting power of the Common Stock sign, date, and deliver to
                  the Corporation's Secretary one (1) or more written demands
                  for the meeting describing the purpose or purposes for which
                  such special meeting is to be held, including all statements
                  necessary to make any statement of such purpose not
                  incomplete, false or misleading, and include any other
                  information specified in Schedule 14A, Rule 14a-3, Rule 14a-8,
                  or Rule 14a-11 of the Rules and Regulations of the Securities
                  and Exchange Commission. Only business within the purpose or
                  purposes described in the meeting notice may be conducted at a
                  special shareholders' meeting."



                                            /s/ Claire M. Gulmi
                                          --------------------------------
                                          Claire M. Gulmi, Secretary

Dated as of July 12, 2001
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 126 (Friday, June 29, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 30730]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-14003]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-9040-1]


Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General 
Information (202) 564-7156 or https://www2.epa.gov/nepa/.

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements
Filed 06/18/2018 Through 06/22/2018
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

    Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public 
its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment 
letters on EISs are available at: https://cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-public/action/eis/search.

EIS No. 20180140, Draft, DOI, OK, Draft Environmental Impact Statement 
for the Proposed Habitat Conservation Plan for the Endangered American 
Burying Beetle for American Electric Power in Oklahoma, Arkansas, and 
Texas, Comment Period Ends: 08/13/2018, Contact: Adam Zerrenner 512-
490-0057
EIS No. 20180141, Final Supplement, USFS, WA, Pack and Saddle Stock 
Outfitter-Guide Special Use Permit Issuance, Review Period Ends: 08/20/
2018, Contact: Paul Willard 509-682-4960
EIS No. 20180142, Draft, BLM, AZ, San Pedro Riparian National 
Conservation Area Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact 
Statement, Comment Period Ends: 09/27/2018, Contact: Amy Markstein 520-
258-7231
EIS No. 20180143, Adoption, DHS, SC, Charleston Naval Complex (CNC) 
Proposed Construction of a Marine Container Terminal Cooper River in 
Charleston Harbor, City of North Charleston, Charleston County, SC, 
Review Period Ends: 07/30/2018, Contact: Mark Harvison 912-267-3239
EIS No. 20180144, Final, FERC, OK, Midcontinent Supply Header 
Interstate Pipeline Project, Review Period Ends: 07/30/2018, Contact: 
Elaine Baum 202-502-6467
EIS No. 20180145, Final, FHWA, NV, Pyramid Highway/US 395 Connection, 
Review Period Ends: 07/30/2018, Contact: Abdelmoez Abdalla 775-687-1231
EIS No. 20180146, Final, USFS, WA, LeClerc Creek Grazing Allotment 
Management Planning, Review Period Ends: 08/13/2018, Contact: Gayne 
Sears 509-447-7300
EIS No. 20180148, Final, USACE, SC, Navy Base Intermodal Container 
Transfer Facility, Review Period Ends: 07/30/2018, Contact: Shawn Boone 
843-329-8044
EIS No. 20190147, Draft, FERC, LA, Calcasieu Pass Project, Comment 
Period Ends: 08/13/2018, Contact: Shannon Crosley 202-502-8853

    Dated: June 26, 2018.
Robert Tomiak,
Director, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2018-14003 Filed 6-28-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
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 Quarterly Report of Western Sierra Mining Corp. on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Dennis Atkins, CFO of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief: (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.



Dated: November 5, 2008

/s/ Dennis AtkinsDennis AtkinsChief Financial Officer



1

---
Form 4046 — Billing Address Code (BAC) For GPO Use Only 

Request a New BAC or Change an Existing BAC Date received 

Note: To establish a Printing and Binding Deposit Account BAC, please use GPO Form 4045. 

New BAC 

To Establish a New BAC — Select Payment Method 

Date BAC IPAC Billing (Indicate below your agency’s ALC, TAS, and BETC) established
 

Non-IPAC Billing ( 
 Check Credit Card )
 

Initial and date when
 

To Change an Existing BAC customer is notified 

Change payment method for BAC . Select NEW payment method from above.
 

Deactivate BAC(s): Enter BAC(s) in the additional information box below.
 

Change ALC from
 to the ALC indicated below. Also include TAS and BETC. 

(Required for IPAC Funding) 

Agency Location Code (ALC) Business Event Type Code (BETC) 

Treasury Account Symbol (TAS) 

Sub-level Allocation Transfer Agency Beginning Period Ending Period of Availability Type Main Account Sub-Account 

Prefix Code (2) Agency Identifier (3) Identifier (3) of Availability (4) Availability (4) Code (1) Code (4) Code (3) 

Update: Contact Information (Requestor and/or Finance POC) in the “Additional Information” box list the BAC(s) this update affects. 

AGENCY REQUESTOR’S POINT-OF-CONTACT INFORMATION 

Name Title 

Department or Government Establishment Bureau/Office 

Address 

City State Zip Code 

Phone Ext. Fax Email 

AGENCY FINANCE POINT-OF-CONTACT INFORMATION 

Name Title 

Address 

City State Zip Code 

Phone Ext. Fax Email 

Does your agency require a Line of Accounting to process IPAC transactions for this BAC? Yes No 

(Go to https://www.gpo.gov/docs/default-source/forms-standards-pdf-files/sf-1_instructions.pdf for more information.) 

Does your agency require a MIPR to process IPAC transactions for this BAC? Yes No
 

Additional Information
 

I am authorized to complete this GPO Form 4046 and that the information provided is correct and accurate. I acknowledge that I am an authorized representative of my agency 

responsible for the above BAC(s). 

Authorizing Signature Title Date 

Submit completed form to the Commercial Billing Section at requestnewbac@gpo.gov
 

For questions call 202.512.0197 or email requestnewbac@gpo.gov.
 

Note: If unable to submit form electronically, fax the completed form to your National Account Manager (NAM) team at 202.312.0171.
 GPO Form 4046 R. 08/2017
#### Ernest TASHEA, Petitioner, v. Marcella SCHETTER and C. B. Schetter, Respondents.

No. 44095.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Sept. 28, 1973.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 16, 1973.

Certiorari denied.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, ERVIN, ADKINS and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
#### Robert A. RAHMING, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-511.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Aug. 21, 1973.

Robert A. Rahming, in pro. per.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

Before PEARSON, CHARLES CARROLL and HENDRY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This court, proceeding in the manner outlined and recommended by the Supreme Court of the United States in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, having deferred ruling on a motion of the public defender to withdraw as counsel for the indigent defendant-appellant, and having furnished appellant with a copy of the public defender’s memorandum brief, and having allowed the appellant a reasonable specified time within which to raise any points that he chose in support of this appeal, and the appellant having failed to respond thereto, on consideration thereof upon full examination of the proceedings we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous. Whereupon, the public defender’s said motion to withdraw is granted, and the order or judgment appealed is hereby affirmed.
# Official Journal C 123A/20 A

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 123A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6020 April 2017 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 123A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6020 April 2017

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) |
| 2017/C 123 A/01 | Notice of open competition — EPSO/AST/140/17 — Nurses (AST 3) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO)

2017/C 123 A/01

Notice of open competition — EPSO/AST/140/17 — Nurses (AST 3)

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7801
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus REGGIE DELOACH, a/k/a Intell Abrams, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CR-98-323) Submitted: March 6, 2003 Decided: March 14, 2003 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Reggie DeLoach, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Wiley Miller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Reggie DeLoach seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). An appeal may not be taken to this court from the final order in a § 2255 proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue for claims addressed by a district court on the merits absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). As to claims dismissed by a district court solely on procedural grounds, a certificate of appealability will not issue unless the petitioner can demonstrate both: “(1) ‘that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right; and (2) that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling.’” Rose v. Lee , 252 F. 3d 676, 684 (4th Cir. 2001) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that DeLoach has not satisfied either standard. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. See Miller-El v. Cockrell , U.S. , 2003 WL 431659 (U.S. Feb. 25, 2003) (No. 01-7662), at *10.3 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 process.

DISMISSED
H. Res. 251

In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

September 21, 1993.

Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it

shall be in order to consider in the House a motion to take

from the Speaker’s table the bill (H.R. 20) to amend title 5,

United States Code, to restore to Federal civilian employees

their right to participate voluntarily, as private citizens, in

the political processes of the Nation, to protect such employees from improper political solicitations, and for other purposes, with a Senate amendment thereto, and to concur in

the Senate amendment. The Senate amendment shall be considered as read. The motion shall be debatable for one hour

equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking

minority member of the Committee on Post Office and Civil

Service. The previous question shall be considered as ordered

on the motion to final adoption without intervening motion.

Attest:

Clerk.
[No. 528-2.

Division Two.

March *3,*1972.]

#### ITT Hamilton Life Insurance Co., *Plaintiff, v.*Norma E. Black, *as Guardian, Appellant,*Sally Reed, *as Guardian, Respondent.*
# Official Journal L 91/2011

| | ISSN 1725-2555
  doi:10.3000/17252555.L_2011.091.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 91 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 546 April 2011 |

ISSN 1725-2555

doi:10.3000/17252555.L_2011.091.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 91

English edition

Legislation

Volume 546 April 2011

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | | 2011/199/EU |
| | * | European Council Decision of 25 March 2011 amending Article 136 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union with regard to a stability mechanism for Member States whose currency is the euro | 1 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

DECISIONS

2011/199/EU

*

European Council Decision of 25 March 2011 amending Article 136 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union with regard to a stability mechanism for Member States whose currency is the euro

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
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.                  

###### Railroad Retirement Board

Notice is hereby given that the Railroad Retirement Board will hold a meeting on July 17, 2018, 10:00 a.m. at the Board's meeting room on the 8th Floor of its headquarters building, 844 North Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611. The agenda for this meeting follows:

*Portion open to the public:*

(1) Executive Committee Reports.

The person to contact for more information is Martha Rico-Parra, Secretary to the Board, Phone No. 312-751-4920.

For the Board.

Dated: June 28, 2018.

Martha Rico-Parra,

Secretary to the Board.

[FR Doc. 2018-14258 Filed 6-28-18; 4:15 pm]

 BILLING CODE 7905-01-P