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

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1624 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

  2d Session
                                S. 1624

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To reauthorize the Hate Crime Statistics Act, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION.

    The first section of the Hate Crime Statistics Act (28 U.S.C. 534 
note) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (b), by striking ``for the calendar year 
        1990 and each of the succeeding 4 calendar years'' and 
        inserting ``for each calendar year''; and
            (2) in subsection (c), by striking ``through fiscal year 
        1994''.

            Passed the Senate May 21, 1996.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
104th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                S. 1624

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To reauthorize the Hate Crime Statistics Act, and for other purposes.
```
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-12-00514-CV

In the Interest of Y.V., A Child §

§

§

§

From the 323rd District Court

of Tarrant County (323-95058J-11)

June 13, 2013

Opinion by Justice Meier

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

there was no error in the trial court’s order. It is ordered that the order of the trial 

court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By _________________________________

 Justice Bill Meier
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2



                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

                      [Letterhead of Paritz & Company, PA]

         We have issued our report dated February 24, 2000, accompanying the
financial statements of Trimol Group, Inc., to be contained in the Annual
Report on Form 10-KSB (the "10-KSB") for Trimol Group, Inc., a Delaware
corporation (the "Company") for its fiscal year ended December 31, 1999. We
consent to the use of the aforementioned reports in the 10-KSB and to the use of
our name as it appears therein.


                                  /s/ PARITZ & COMPANY, PA
                                  ------------------------------

                                  April 10, 2000
f10k2010a1ex10xxiii_chinayid.htm



Exhibit 10.23




 


[English Summary]







Jiangxi Province Fenyi County Tourism Project


Cooperation and Development Agreement







Party A: Jiangxi Province Fenyi County Government


Party B: Yida (Fujian) Tourism Limited Company







Responsibilities:


Party A shall provide tourism resources and construction of public facilities according to this Agreement. Party A shall not attend any activities in the tourism area for profit.







Party B shall be responsible for the construction of tourism facilities, operations, risks and liabilities associated with.







Exclusive Rights and Term:


Party B shall be entitled to the exclusive rights to develop, operate and manage the tourism resources, such as caves, spas and natural resources, in Mengshan area, Fenyi County, for a period of 40 years from date of project development.







Party B shall also have the preemptive rights to development and operate other tourism resources in Fenyi County.







Revenue Sharing:


Party B shall pay the following to Party A as fees or compensation for using the resources:


For the first five years, Party B is not required to pay any fees to Party A;


From the second five years, Party B shall pay to Party A 5% of its annual revenues from selling the tickets;


Starting from the 11th year, Party B shall pay to Party A 8% of its annual revenues from selling the tickets.







Investment:


The total investment for the project is 300,000,000 RMB:


The first phase, mainly composed of Altair Cave and Vega Cave, is scheduled to start trial operation in 2012. Its investment budget is 100,000,000 RMB;


The second phase will include the Hanmao Cave Cluster for 100,000,000 RMB investment budget; and


The third phase will include the tourism resources of Dagang Mountain for 100,000,000 RMB investment budget.







Force Majeure:


Either party shall not be liable under this Agreement if the Agreement is terminated earlier because of force majeure.







Dispute:


If there is any dispute between the parties, both parties shall resolve the dispute through compromise settlement. If the parties cannot reach the settlement, then either party can resolve the dispute by the courts of Xinhui City or Fuzhou City.







Date of the Agreement:


May 25, 2010


 


 

1
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)   In connection with the Quarterly Report of First National Power Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Peter Wanner, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), 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 result of operations of the Company.  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the 5th day of November, 2008.    /s/ Peter Wanner Peter Wanner Dated: November 5, 2008
# CHAPTER 2 Issue Category: When Does This Action Take Effect? Page 2- 1408

Response to Public Comments Water Quality Standard s Regulatory Revisions

August 2015

40 CFR Part 131 Docket #: EPA - HQ - OW - 2010 - 0606

This document is part of a larger document.Chapter 2 - Comment Documents When Does This Action Take Effect? 11 - WHEN DOES THIS ACTION TAKE EFFECT? No Comments are Applicable to this Issue Category, and Thus No Response is Necessary.
11.A - EFFECT - GEN SUPP No Comments are Applicable to this Issue Category, and Thus No Response is Necessary.
11.B - EFFECT - GEN OPP No Comments are Applicable to this Issue Category, and Thus No Response is Necessary.
11.C - EFFECT - OTHER OPTIONS No Comments are Applicable to this Issue Category, and Thus No Response is Necessary.

08/04/2015 05:01 PM EDT 2-1408
FILED INCOURT OFAPPEALS 12tfi Court of AppealsDistrict

OFFICIAL NOTICE FROM COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS P.O. BOX 12308, CAPITOL STATION, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711


### \U FILE COPY

10/13/2015 

### WALKER, WILBERT Tr. Ct. No. 12CR-115 COANo. 12-13-00333-CR PD-0592-15 

## Pursuant to Rule 69.4(a)T.R.A.P., the record isreturned to the court of appeals. Abel Acosta, Clerk 12TH COURT OF APPEALS CLERK CATHY LUSK 

### 1517 W. FRONT, ROOM 354 TYLER, TX 75701 * DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *
May 7, 2014 

Secretary Anthony Foxx 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

RE: Docket DOT -OST -2008-0299 

Dear Secretary Foxx, 

: ---, ~ .· .. § • .,..J 

I write to express my concerns with the Department of Transportation's Tentative Order to 

terminate the Essential Air Service (EAS) program in El Centro, California located in Imperial 

County. I urge you to consider the negative economic impacts that may occur as a result of 

the proposed termination of the program. 

The Imperial County Airport has a tremendous track record of surpassing the EAS program 

requirements put forth by the government, as they have dramatically exceeded the 

enplanement minimum in four of the last five fiscal years. Unfortunately, in FY 2013, the 

Imperial County Airport barely fell below the ten enplanement threshold, by reaching 9.5 

enplanements for the first time. 

As you know, the Essential Air Service was put into place to guarantee that small 

communities, including those within the Imperial County, continue to be served by certificated 

air carriers. Over the last several years, Imperial County has experienced the highest 

unemployment rate in the nation. Our federal government should encourage economic 

growth, and consider all factors before terminating a much-needed program in the region. 

As you prepare the Final Order, I urge you to consider the Imperial Valley's track record over 

the last three fiscal years, and ask that you consider the void that will be left should the 

Department of Transportation ultimately decide to terminate the much-needed Essential Air 

Service program currently in effect at the Imperial County Airport. 

Thank you for your time and consideration of my request. 

~cere I):'. 

·"'-., ~.", 

···~ ... 

David M. Tyler 

\ 

1225 W. Main Street El Centro CA 92243 I www.tylerins.com I (760) 352-2611 I Fax (760) 337-8428 license No. 0226696
Exhibit 10.7 Promissory Note


Exhibit 10.7




PROMISSORY NOTE







$10,000 U.S.                                                                                                                                                Due Date: December 14, 2012




FOR VALUE RECEIVED, FUTURE ENERGY CORP. (the “Borrower”), unconditionally promises to pay to the order of GEORGES PAQUET, (the “Lender”) the sum of $10,000 in United States of America funds, together with interest at the rate of Royal Bank of Canada Prime Interest Rate plus 2% per annum on the principal amount remaining unpaid, after as well as before demand or maturity or default, calculated on an annual basis (on the basis of a year of 365 days for the actual number of days elapsed) and payable on demand; PROVIDED that if the Borrower fails to pay on demand any payment of principal or interest on this note, then in such event the entire unpaid principal and all accrued and unpaid interest thereon shall become and be forthwith due and payable without presentment, notice, protest or demand of any kind (all of which are hereby expressly waived by the Borrower).




The Borrower hereby agrees that the proper law of this instrument is the law of the Province of British Columbia and that this instrument shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws thereof and the undersigned agrees that any legal suit, action or proceeding brought upon or arising out of or relating to this instrument may be instituted in the courts of such Province and the undersigned hereby accepts and irrevocably submits and attorns to the exclusive jurisdiction of the said courts and acknowledges their competence and agrees to be bound by any judgment thereof, provided that nothing herein shall limit the right of the Lender to bring proceedings against the Borrower elsewhere.







This Promissory Note is dated the 14th day of December 2011.










FUTURE ENERGY CORP.










Per: /s/ Georges Paquet             

Georges Paquet, Chairman
July 03, 2015

Twelfth Court of Appeals

1517 W Front St Ste 354

Tyler TX 75702-7854

Re: Donnie Dale Carr

 12-14-00335-CR

To The Honorable Clerk of the Court:

Please find enclosed a copy of the letter sent to my client regarding his right to file a PDR along 

with a copy of the certified return receipt showing the mailing of the same. 

Sincerely,

/s/Austin Reeve Jackson

ACCEPTED

12-14-00335-CR

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS

TYLER, TEXAS

7/3/2015 9:43:37 AM

CATHY LUSK

CLERK

 FILED IN 12th COURT OF APPEALS TYLER, TEXAS 7/3/2015 9:43:37 AM CATHY S. LUSK Clerk
July 02, 2015

Donnie Dale Carr

Inmate 01960656

Clements Unit

9601 Spur 591

Amarillo, TX 77328

Re: Opinion

 

Mr. Carr: 

Please find enclosed a copy of opinion issued by the Court of Appeals in your case. The Court 

has affirmed your conviction.

Should you desire to do so, you do have the right to file a pro se Petition for Discretionary 

Review in the Court of Criminal Appeals. If you decide to pursue that option you must file your 

petition prior to the expiration of thirty days from the date of the court’s opinion.

I would be happy to address any questions or concerns you have if you will simply let me know. 

Sincerely,

Austin Reeve Jackson
#### JOHN DOE Individually and on behalf of his minor two children, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. STATE OF LOUISIANA, et al., Defendants, PAULA BENNETT AND SHERYL GEORGE, Defendants-Appellants.

No. 92-3144.

Dec. 17, 1992.

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

Before THORNBERRY, DAVIS and SMITH.

PER CURIAM:

The court having decided that this case should be heard at Oral Argument, the original opinion is VACATED and the case shall appear on the Oral Argument Calendar.
Exhibit 10.1







[ENERSYS LETTERHEAD]






 



 










HOWARD I. HOFFEN



Chairman -- Compensation Committee






 






 



 



	


April 13, 2005











 



Mr. John D. Craig



6 Rick Road



Shillington PA  19607







Dear John:






With reference to your employment agreement (the "Employment Agreement") with EnerSys Delaware Inc., f/k/a Yuasa, Inc., (the "Company"), dated November 9, 2000, and related documents pursuant to which you are currently employed as Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer of EnerSys and the Company, we confirm that your salary as set forth in Section 3 of the Employment Agreement is increased to $745,000.00, effective as of April 1, 2005.






Except as expressly set forth in the letter, the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.






	


ENERSYS 







 

	


By:
	


/s/ Howard I. Hoffen
	

	 	


Howard I. Hoffen



Chairman -- Compensation Committee
dep

west virginia department of environmental protection

Division of Air Quality

601 57

th ST SE

Charleston, WV 25304

Earl Ray Tomblin, Governor

Randy C. Huffman, Cabinet Secretary

dep.wv.gov

January 22, 2013

Ms. Diana Esher, Director

Air Protection Division

U.S. EPA Region 3

1650 Arch Street (3APOO)

Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029

Re: West Virginia Update on I-hour Sulfur Dioxide (S02) Monitoring Data and Designations

Dear Ms. Esher:

In a May 23, 2011 letter from Cabinet Secretary Randy Huffman to EPA Region 3 Regional

Administrator Shawn Garvin, WVDEP identified five counties that were violating the 2010 l-hour S02

standard, based upon the most recent available monitoring data at that time (2008-2010). The counties

included: Brooke, Hancock, Marshall, Monongalia and Wood. Subsequent air monitoring data (2010-

2012) indicates that the air quality has significantly improved in three ofthose counties: Hancock,

Monongalia, and Wood, showing that these counties appear to be fully meeting the standard. Therefore,

West Virginia is now recommending that EPA designate these counties as attainmentlunc1assifiable for

the 2010 I-hour S02 standard.

WVDEP has uploaded the pertinent data into EPA's Air Quality System, (AQS) but has not yet

completed all the necessary quality control/quality assurance procedures. One complicating factor is the

2010-2012 monitoring data from monitor 54-107-1002, located in Parkersburg, WV (Wood County). This

monitor is now showing attainment of the standard, with a 2010-2012 design value of 52 ppb. Although

2011 data does not meet the capture criteria for this monitor, a substitution analysis of the data was

conducted in accordance with 40 C.F.R Part 50, Appendix T. WVDEP and Ohio EPA worked jointly on

this analysis and both are in support of the results. The monitor remains in attainment following

appropriate consideration of missing data.

Due to the recent retirement of a key staff person, we may not be able to perform certification of the

uploaded AQS values as quickly as we may have done in the past. We plan to certify the West Virginia 1-

hour S02 data as soon as practicable, but no later than March 29, 2013. We urge EPA to consider the

current uploaded AQS data in making its designations under the 2010 l-hour S02 standard. If you or your

staff have any questions or would like additional information, please feel free to contact me at (304) 926-

0462 or Fred Durham, Deputy Director, at (304) 926-0499 ext. 1242.

John A. Benedict, Director

Division of Air Quality

cc: Donna Mastro

Promoting a healthy environment.
#### Steven BRISTOW, Petitioner-Appellant, v. David A. BRAXTON, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 02-7859.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 16, 2003.

Decided Jan. 27, 2003.

Steven Bristow, Appellant Pro Se.

Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Steven Bristow, a Virginia inmate, seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition as untimely. An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). When, as here, a district court dismisses a § 2254 petition 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.) (quoting *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000)), *cert. denied,*534 U.S. 941, 122 S.Ct. 318, 151 L.Ed.2d 237 (2001).

We have reviewed the record and conclude for the reasons stated by the district court that Bristow has not made the requisite showing. *See Bristow v. Braxton,*No. CA-02-1194-AM (E.D. Va., filed Oct. 22, 2002 *&*entered Oct. 23, 2002). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, deny Bristow’s motion to vacate the judgment of conviction, and dismiss the appeal. 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.*
*

 Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-40286

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ANTONIA BERRY, also known as Tony Berry,

 DefendantAppellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:92-CR-93-1

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

September 30, 2002

Before JONES, STEWART and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Antonia Berry, federal prisoner # 03256-043, appealsthe district court’s denial of his motion

to reduce sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c). Berry argues that his base offense level should

be reduced under Amendment 505 to the sentencing guidelines. Section 3582(c)(2) authorizes a

reduction in the term of imprisonment imposed when a sentencing range subsequently has been

lowered by the Sentencing Commission and the amendment has been made retroactive. Berry has
2

not shown that a reduction in his base offense level based on Amendment 505 would result in a

change in the applicable term of imprisonment. The district court did not abuse its discretion in

denying the motion. Therefore, we dismiss this appeal as frivolous, noting that Berry raised an

identical and unsuccessful motion to reduce his sentence in 1995. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2; Howard v.

King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). 

We do not addressthe various other issuesraised byBerry in his appellate brief because these

issues were not raised before the district court or exceed the scope of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)

motion. The motion for judicial notice and the supplemental motion are DENIED. 

Berry is CAUTIONED that further frivolousfilings may result in the imposition ofsanctions,

including dismissal, monetary sanctions, and restrictions on his ability to file pleadings in this court

and any court subject to this court’s jurisdiction. 

APPEALDISMISSEDAS FRIVOLOUS;MOTIONS DENIED; SANCTIONS WARNING

ISSUED.
EXHIBIT 32.2
 Certification Pursuant to
Exchange Act Rule 15d-14(b) and
18 U.S.C. Section 1350
  i.
    
    The report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act 1934; andii.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition of the Company.
  Dated: May 15, 2008
    /s/ Kevin M. BridgesName:
    Kevin M. BridgesTitle:
    Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                  JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                    DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           19,954,827
<SECURITIES>                                      7,588,693
<RECEIVABLES>                                             0
<ALLOWANCES>                                              0
<INVENTORY>                                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 27,669,869
<PP&E>                                            1,731,312
<DEPRECIATION>                                    (603,281)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   29,254,938
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               821,121
<BONDS>                                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                             82,580
<OTHER-SE>                                       28,351,237
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     29,254,938
<SALES>                                                   0  
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                          0
<CGS>                                                     0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   (6,802,541)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  863,460
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (5,939,081)
<INCOME-TAX>                                              0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (5,939,081)
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (5,939,081)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (0.88)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (0.88)
        


</TABLE>
November 17, 2011

MEMORANDUM

From: William H. Maxwell

EPA/SPPD/ESG (D243-01)

To: Docket Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234

Subject: Meeting with Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)

Attendees :

See attached.

Discussion :

A general discussion was held of the comments submitted by Natural Resources Defense

Council on the proposed Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS).
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 333-159741,
333-159741-01, 333-159741-02, 333-159741-03 on Form F-3 of our reports dated March 10, 2010, relating
to the consolidated financial statements of UnionBanCal Corporation and subsidiaries and the effectiveness of the UnionBanCal Corporation's internal control over financial reporting, appearing in the
Annual Report on Form 10-K of the UnionBanCal Corporation and subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2009.

/s/
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

San
Francisco, California
March 10, 2010

---



QuickLinks