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 State

          - [Public Notice 7837]

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,                         *et seq.;*22 U.S.C. 6501 note,                         *et seq.*), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, and Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 of August 28, 2000 (and, as appropriate, Delegation of Authority No. 257 of April 15, 2003), I hereby determine that the objects to be included in the exhibition “Nicolai Fechin,” imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan agreements with the foreign owners or custodians. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the Museum of Russian Art, Minneapolis, Minnesota, from on or about August 18, 2012, until on or about January 13, 2013, the Frye Art Museum, Seattle, Washington, from on or about February 2, 2013, until on or about April 7, 2013, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these Determinations be published in the                         **Federal Register**                        .                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For further information, including a list of the exhibit objects, contact Paul W. Manning, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6469). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, SA-5, L/PD, Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03), Washington, DC 20522-0505.

 Dated: March 28, 2012.

J. Adam Ereli,

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.

[FR Doc. 2012-8096 Filed 4-3-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
Exhibit 32.1





STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Village Bank and Trust Financial Corp. (the Company) for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that based on their knowledge and belief: (1) the Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and (2) the information contained in the Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for the periods presented.











/s/ Thomas W. Winfree

May 12, 2006

Thomas W. Winfree

Date

Chief Executive Officer











/s/ C. Harril Whitehurst, Jr.

May 12, 2006

C. Harril Whitehurst, Jr.

Date

Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 329 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 329

Expressing the sense of the Congress regarding the importance of organ, 
 tissue, bone marrow, and blood donation and supporting National Donor 
                                  Day.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 13, 2002

 Mrs. Thurman (for herself, Mr. Cantor, Mr. Hansen, Mr. Langevin, Mr. 
     Dan Miller of Florida, Mr. Moore, Mr. Sherman, Mr. Stark, Mr. 
Traficant, Mr. Waxman, and Mr. Wynn) submitted the following concurrent 
 resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Expressing the sense of the Congress regarding the importance of organ, 
 tissue, bone marrow, and blood donation and supporting National Donor 
                                  Day.

Whereas more than 80,000 individuals await organ transplants at any given 
        moment;
Whereas another man, woman, or child is added to the national organ transplant 
        waiting list every 20 minutes;
Whereas despite the progress in the last 16 years, more than 16 people per day 
        die because of a shortage of donor organs;
Whereas almost everyone is a potential organ, tissue, and blood donor;
Whereas transplantation has become an element of mainstream medicine that 
        prolongs and enhances life;
Whereas for the fifth consecutive year, a coalition of health organizations is 
        joining forces for National Donor Day;
Whereas the first four National Donor Days raised a total of nearly 30,000 units 
        of blood, added over 6,000 potential donors to the National Marrow Donor 
        Program Registry, and distributed tens of thousands of organ and tissue 
        pledge cards;
Whereas National Donor Day is America's largest one-day organ, tissue, bone 
        marrow, and blood donation event; and
Whereas the Department of Health and Human Services and a number of businesses, 
        foundations, and health organizations have designated February 14, 2002, 
        as National Donor Day: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That the Congress--
            (1) supports the goals and ideas of National Donor Day;
            (2) encourages all Americans to learn about the importance 
        of organ, tissue, bone marrow, and blood donation and to 
        discuss such donation with their families and friends; and
            (3) requests that the President issue a proclamation 
        calling on the people of the United States to conduct 
        appropriate ceremonies, activities, and programs to demonstrate 
        support for organ, tissue, bone marrow, and blood donation.
                                 <all>
```
-81 -80 -79 -78 -77 -76 -75

 37

 38

 39

 40

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★

▲ ▲

▲

▲ 500

 1000

 1500

 500

18 12 06 00

05/26

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 26 May 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.92 N 77.01 W Meters AGL
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 161 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 161

  Honoring the 19 United States servicemen who died in the terrorist 
     bombing of the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia on June 25, 1996.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 14, 2001

 Mr. Isakson submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
  Honoring the 19 United States servicemen who died in the terrorist 
     bombing of the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia on June 25, 1996.

Whereas June 25, 2001, marks the fifth anniversary of the tragic terrorist 
        bombing of the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia;
Whereas this act of senseless violence took the lives of 19 brave United States 
        servicemen, and wounded 500 others;
Whereas these nineteen men killed while serving their country were Captain 
        Christopher Adams, Sergeant Daniel Cafourek, Sergeant Millard Campbell, 
        Sergeant Earl Cartrette, Jr., Sergeant Patrick Fennig, Captain Leland 
        Haun, Sergeant Michael Heiser, Sergeant Kevin Johnson, Sergeant Ronald 
        King, Sergeant Kendall Kitson, Jr., Airman First Class Christopher 
        Lester, Airman First Class Brent Marthaler, Airman First Class Brian 
        McVeigh, Airman First Class Peter Morgera, Sergeant Thanh Nguyen, Airman 
        First Class Joseph Rimkus, Senior Airman Jeremy Taylor, Airman First 
        Class Justin Wood, and Airman First Class Joshua Woody;
Whereas those guilty of this attack have yet to be brought to justice;
Whereas the families of these brave servicemen still mourn their loss and await 
        the day when those guilty of this act are brought to justice; and
Whereas terrorism remains a constant and ever-present threat around the world: 
        Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That the Congress, on the occasion of the fifth anniversary of the 
terrorist bombing of the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, recognizes the 
sacrifice of the 19 servicemen who died in that attack, and calls upon 
every American to pause and pay tribute to these brave soldiers and to 
remain ever vigilant for signs which may warn of a terrorist attack.
                                 <all>
```
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

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

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

December 26, 2012

h1217

Order 

December 26, 2012

145934

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 145934

COA: 311523

Isabella CC: 2012-000260-FH

DARIN MIKAL COMSTOCK,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 22, 2012 

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

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
#### Lorenzi Unemployment Compensation Case.

Argued March 21, 1362.

Before Rhodes, F. J., Ervin, Wrigiit, Woodside, Watkins, Montgomery, and Flood, JJ.

*Frank J. Lorenzi,*appellant, in propria persona.

*Sydney Reuben,*Assistant Attorney General, with him *David Stahl,*Attorney General, for Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, appellee.

April 12, 1962:

Opinion by

Watkins, J.,

In this unemployment compensation case benefits were denied by the compensation authorities under the provisions of §402(a) of the Unemployment Compensation Law, 43 PS §S02(a), in that the claimant, Frank J. Lorenzi, a research chemist, had refused proffered work as a chemical engineer, at a salary of $500 a month, by telling the prospective employer, by tele*574phone, that he expected twice that salary so that he was not intervieived further. He had been out of work seven months and had been paid $750 a month in his last employment.

We have held many times that the good cause necessary for refusing proffered work rests on the good faith of the claimant, which includes conduct which is consistent with the genuine desire to work and be self-supporting. His action, in regard to the employment offered was, in effect, a refusal of the work because of the difference in salary and did not constitute good cause as required by the law. *Weiland Unemployment Compensation Case,*167 Pa. Superior Ct. 554, 76 A. 2d 457 (1950); *Bentz Unemployment Compensation Case,*190 Pa. Superior Ct. 582, 155 A. 2d 461 (1959); *D’Amato Unemployment Compensation Case,*196 Pa. Superior Ct. 76, 173 A. 2d 680 (1961).

Decision affirmed.
**
**Exhibit 15.4**

**Consent of Independent Auditors**

Weconsent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Experts” and to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-261517 on FormF-4 of PropertyGuru Group Limited of our report dated September 17, 2021, relating to the combined financial statements of the Panama Group as of and for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019appearing in this Shell Company Report on Form 20-F of PropertyGuru Group Limited. 

/s/ Ernst &Young PLT 

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia 

March 23, 2022 
**
#### James A. BOCKOVER and Marilyn R. Bockover, his wife, Appellants, v. SIGNATURE REALTY OF ST. PETERSBURG, INC., a Florida corporation, Signature, Inc., a dissolved Florida corporation, Park Bank of Florida, a Florida banking corporation, and Best Business Brokers, Inc., a Florida corporation, Appellees.

No. 85-2459.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 18, 1986.

*166Dominic E. Amadio of Law Offices of Dominic E. Amadio, St. Petersburg, for appellants.

L. Geoffrey Young of Robbins, Gaynor, Burton, Hampp, Burns, Bronstein & Shasteen, P.A., St. Petersburg, for appellees Park Bank of Florida.

CAMPBELL, Judge.

Appellants appeal a final judgment in this case involving an agreement for deed. Appellee/cross-appellant Park Bank of Florida cross-appeals an order entered subsequent to the final judgment which order disposed of rent receipts held in escrow. We reverse and remand on appellants/cross-appellees’ appeal from the final judgment and affirm on the cross-appeal of Park Bank. Appellee/cross-appellant Park Bank was the only appellee responding to this appeal.

Appellants and appellee Signature, Inc. entered into an agreement for deed on January 1, 1980, wherein appellants were the vendors and appellee Signature, Inc. was the vendee. Signature, Inc. subsequently assigned its interest in the agreement for deed to Signature Realty of St. Petersburg, Inc. The vendees defaulted under the terms of the agreement by failing to make payments when due. Appellants elected, pursuant to the terms of the agreement, to accelerate the entire balance due and brought their action below seeking foreclosure of the agreement for deed. The trial court determined that the appellee vendees had defaulted and found appellants entitled to the entire balance due, but rather than ordering foreclosure of the security of the agreement, entered final judgment for the balance due together with interests, costs and attorney’s fees.

Appellants cite as error the failure of the trial court to order foreclosure of the security of the agreement for deed. Appellants are correct and the court below erred in failing to order foreclosure. *Ernest v. Carter,*368 So.2d 428 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979); *Adkinson v. Nyberg,*344 So.2d 614 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977). The agreement for deed involved in this proceeding provided for an acceleration of the debt at the option of the vendors in the event of a default in payments as did the agreement in *Ernest.*

On remand, the trial court shall follow the instructions of *Ernest*and *Adkinson*in ordering foreclosure of the security of the agreement for deed for the entire amount of the balance due under the agreement as accelerated.

Reversed on appeal, affirmed on cross-appeal.

RYDER, C.J., and SCHEB, J., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 65 (Wednesday, April 4, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 20319]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8121]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 16

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0176]
RIN 2120-AJ97


Rules of Practice for Federally-Assisted Airport Enforcement 
Proceedings (Retrospective Regulatory Review)

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); correction.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is correcting a notice of proposed rulemaking that 
published in the Federal Register on March 5, 2012 (77 FR 13027). In 
that document, the FAA proposed to amend its regulations to update, 
simplify, and streamline rules of practice and procedure for filing and 
adjudicating complaints against federally-assisted airports. This 
correction clarifies that the notice number for that proposed 
rulemaking is 12-02.

DATES: The comment period will close on May 4, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melissa Loughlin, Office of 
Rulemaking, ARM-204, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence 
Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-4055; facsimile 
(202) 267-5075; email <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e08d858c89939381ce8c8f9587888c898ea0868181ce878f96"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d0bdb5bcb9a3a3b1febcbfa5b7b8bcb9be90b6b1b1feb7bfa6">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On March 5, 2012, the FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NPRM) entitled, ``Rules of Practice for Federally-Assisted Airport 
Enforcement Proceedings (Retrospective Regulatory Review)'' (77 FR 
13027).
    In that NPRM, the FAA proposed to update, simplify, and streamline 
rules of practice and procedure for filing and adjudicating complaints 
against federally-assisted airports. The proposed requirements would 
improve efficiency by enabling parties to file submissions with the FAA 
electronically, and by incorporating modern business practices into how 
the FAA handles complaints. If adopted, the amendment would reflect 
changes in applicable laws and regulations, and apply lessons learned 
since the existing rules were implemented in 1996.

Correction

    In FR Doc. 2012-4993, beginning on page 13027 in the Federal 
Register of March 5, 2012, make the following correction:
    On page 13027, in the second column and fourth line under the 
NPRM's publication, correct ``Notice No. 12-01'' to read as ``Notice 
No. 12-02''.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 26, 2012.
Pamela Hamilton-Powell,
Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2012-8121 Filed 4-3-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### Dellinger Unemployment Compensation Case.

Argued November 14, 1961.

Before Ervin, Wright, Woodside, Watkins, Montgomery, and Flood, JJ. (Rhodes, P. J., absent).

*Richard Dellinger,*appellant, in propria persona, submitted a brief.

*Sydney Reuben,*Assistant Attorney General, with him *David Stahl,*Attorney General, for Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, appellee.

December 14, 1961:

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The six Judges who heard the argument of this appeal being equally divided in opinion, the decision of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review is affirmed.
Exhibit 31.1

Rule 13a – 14(a)/15(d) – 14(a)

 

I, William Marshall, Principal Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer of Cascade Energy Inc. (“the Registrant”) certify that:
|   | 1. I have reviewed this Quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Cascade Energy Inc.; |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have: 

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c) presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and 

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this annual report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

 

Date:  January 19, 2007

/s/ William Marshall

William Marshall

Chief Executive Officer
IV

107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 307

Expressing the sense of the Congress that the Attorney General should

appoint an independent counsel to investigate and report on campaign

donations made to federally elected officials by Enron Corporation.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 24, 2002

Mr. TRAFICANT submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was

referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the Congress that the Attorney General should appoint an independent counsel to investigate

and report on campaign donations made to federally

elected officials by Enron Corporation.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that the

3 Attorney General should appoint an independent counsel

4 to investigate and report on campaign donations made to

5 federally elected officials by Enron Corporation.

Æ
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

KEITH SMITH,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 552 EAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 8th day of May, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.

Justice Wecht did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.