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: 12343]

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I hereby determine that certain objects being imported from abroad pursuant to an agreement with their foreign owner or custodian for temporary display in the exhibition “Art and War in the Renaissance: The Battle of Pavia Tapestries” at the Kimbell Art Museum, Fort Worth, Texas; the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco, de Young Museum, San Francisco, California; The Museum of Fine Arts, Houston, in Houston, Texas; and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, are of cultural significance, and, further, that their temporary exhibition or display within the United States as aforementioned is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these determinations be published in the                         **Federal Register**                        .                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Reed Liriano, Program Coordinator, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6471; email:                         *section2459@state.gov*). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, L/PD, 2200 C Street NW (SA-5), Suite 5H03, Washington, DC 20522-0505.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The foregoing determinations were made 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, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 of August 28, 2000, and Delegation of Authority No. 523 of December 22, 2021.                

Nicole L. Elkon,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Professional and Cultural Exchanges, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.

[FR Doc. 2024-03933 Filed 2-26-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

# **Certifications**

# ** **

I,Richard A. Smith, certify that:

 

1.I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q, as amended, of EschelonTelecom, Inc.,

 

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

 

3.Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a)              Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

b)             Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,as of the end of period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

c)              Disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarterin the case of a annual report) that has materially affected, or reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and

 

5.The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

a)              All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize, and report financial information; and

 

b)             Any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s control over financial reporting.

 
|   | June  29, 2004                        |
|--------|---------------------------------------|
|   |                                  |
|   |                                  |
|   | Sign:                                 | /S/    Richard  A. Smith |   |
|   |                                  | Richard A. Smith |
|   | President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
#### J. M. DUBOSE et ux., Appellants, v. ABILENE & SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 3141.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Eastland.

Feb. 4, 1955.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 25, 1955.

A. J. Smith, Sr., Anson, for appellants.

John Alvis, Wagstaff, Harwell, Alvis & Pope, Abilene, for appellee.

GRISSOM, Chief Justice.

In 1949 Dubose and wife filed a suit in trespass to try title to a 6 and %oo acres of land against the Abilene and Southern Railway Company. Plaintiffs claimed the title to said tract (1) under the ten years statute of limitation and (2) on the theory that the deed to the railway company conveyed only a right of way or easement over a larger tract of land subsequently purchased by plaintiffs; that thereafter the railway company ceased to use said tract as a railroad right of way and thereupon the title vested in plaintiffs, who owned the land on each side of said strip. In a trial to the court in February, 1950, Mr. Dubose testified positively that he had not claimed the land for ten years, that is, he testified he had been claiming it for only four or five years. At the conclusion of the testimony, the court advised plaintiffs they had lost their suit,' disqualified himself and advised the parties to get another judge to try the case.1 Several days after the trial, plaintiffs filed a motion for a non-suit and the court entered an order on February 15, 1950 dismissing said cause, which was Number 8158. On February 20, 1950, plaintiffs filed a suit numbered 8274 alleging the same cáuse of action against the sanie defendant. The railway company filed an answer and a cross-action for the title to said land and, on May 1, 1954, filed a motion for summary judgment. Plaintiffs filed a “motion to quash” defendant’s motion for summary judgment and alleged that in 1910 said railway company acquired from T. S. Knox a right of way to the strip in controversy and that in 1935 the railway discontinued use of said land as a railroad right of way. Plaintiffs copied in said motion the deed from Knox to the railway company. (This deed conveyed the 6.1 acres of “land” involved in this suit. It conveyed the land, not a mere easement). For said reasons, plaintiffs alleged defendant was not entitled to a summary judgment but plaintiffs were entitled to a judgment awarding them the title.

*547Plaintiffs’ “motion to quash” was overruled. On a hearing of defendant’s motion for summary judgment it introduced the testimony of Mr. Dubose on the former trial, heretofore referred to, the former pleadings and the order of dismissal. The court rendered judgment for the defendant and plaintiffs have appealed.

The plain and unequivocal testimony of Mr. Dubose showed conclusively that plaintiffs had not claimed the land in controversy for ten years. The deed to the railway company conveyed the land, not a mere easement. It is, therefore, evident plaintiffs were not entitled to recover on either of the theories on which they relied.

The judgment is affirmed.

1

. Thereafter, another judge was selected and the new judge tried the case now on appeal.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 195 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 195

           For the relief of Nery Antonio Velasquez-Roblero.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 5, 2011

Mr. Pastor of Arizona introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
           For the relief of Nery Antonio Velasquez-Roblero.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR NERY ANTONIO VELASQUEZ-
              ROBLERO.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of section 
201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Nery Antonio Velasquez-
Roblero shall be eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa or for 
adjustment of status to that of an alien lawfully admitted for 
permanent residence upon filing an application for issuance of an 
immigrant visa under section 204 of such Act or for adjustment of 
status to lawful permanent resident.
    (b) Adjustment of Status.--If Nery Antonio Velasquez-Roblero enters 
the United States before the filing deadline specified in subsection 
(c), he shall be considered to have entered and remained lawfully and 
shall, if otherwise eligible, be eligible for adjustment of status 
under section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as of the date 
of the enactment of this Act.
    (c) Deadline for Application and Payment of Fees.--Subsections (a) 
and (b) shall apply only if the application for issuance of an 
immigrant visa or the application for adjustment of status is filed 
with appropriate fees within 2 years after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
    (d) Reduction of Immigrant Visa Number.--Upon the granting of an 
immigrant visa or permanent residence to Nery Antonio Velasquez-
Roblero, the Secretary of State shall instruct the proper officer to 
reduce by 1, during the current or next following fiscal year, the 
total number of immigrant visas that are made available to natives of 
the country of the alien's birth under section 203(a) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act or, if applicable, the total number of 
immigrant visas that are made available to natives of the country of 
the alien's birth under section 202(e) of such Act.
    (e) Denial of Preferential Immigration Treatment for Certain 
Relatives.--The natural parents, brothers, and sisters of Nery Antonio 
Velasquez-Roblero shall not, by virtue of such relationship, be 
accorded any right, privilege, or status under the Immigration and 
Nationality Act.
                                 <all>
```
Environmental Degradation Summary for PMNs Related to XXX
U.S. Governmental Advisory Committee

2012-2014 Membership Roster

Octaviana V. Trujillo, Ph.D., CHAIR

Tribal Council Member 

Pascua Yaqui Tribe

Flagstaff, Arizona 

Alejandro M. Rodarte 

Assistant Secretary for Border Affairs

California Environmental Protection Agency 

Sacramento, California 

Edna A. Mendoza

Director

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 

Office of Border Environmental Protection 

Southern Regional Office 

Tucson, Arizona 

Ginny Broadhurst

Executive Director

Northwest Straits Commission

Mount Vernon, Washington 

Katherine L. Gajewski

Director of Sustainability

City of Philadelphia 

Mayor’s Office of Sustainability

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

Dale G. Medearis, Ph.D. 

Senior Environmental Planner 

Environmental & Planning Services

Northern Virginia Regional Commission 

Fairfax, Virginia 

Cristina Viesca-Santos, J.D.

Assistant County Attorney

El Paso County Attorney’s Office

Environmental Crimes Unit 

El Paso, Texas 

John M. Bernal

Deputy County Administrator 

Pima County Public Works Administration 

Tucson, Arizona 

Salud Carbajal

First District Supervisor

County of Santa Barbara 

Santa Barabara, California

Kirk V. Cook 

Supervisor

Washington State Department of Agriculture

Olympia, Washington 

Therese H. Goodmann 

Assistant City Manager

City Manager’s Office

City of Dubuque, City Hall 

Dubuque, Iowa 

Carlos Rubinstein

Commissioner

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

Austin, Texas 

Roger Vintze

Manager

Enforcement and Emergency Response Program

California Department of Toxics 

Substances Control 

El Centro, California 

Gerald Wagner 

Environmental Director

Environmental Program 

Blackfeet Nation Tribe

Browning, Montana
112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 1556 

AN ACT 

To amend the Omnibus Indian Advancement Act to allow 

certain land to be used to generate income to provide 

funding for academic programs, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 1556 EH

1 SECTION 1. LAND USE. 

2 Section 824(a) of the Omnibus Indian Advancement 

3 Act (Public Law 106–568) is amended to read as follows: 

4 ‘‘(a) LIMITATION FOR EDUCATIONAL, HEALTH, CUL5 TURAL, AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES.—The 

6 land taken into trust under section 823(a) shall be used 

7 solely for the educational, health, or cultural purposes of 

8 the Santa Fe Indian School and economic development 

9 projects that provide funding for such purposes.’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives June 18, 2012. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 1556 

AN ACT 

To amend the Omnibus Indian Advancement Act to 

for other purposes. to provide funding for academic programs, and allow certain land to be used to generate income
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15

- 40311 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
CASEY LUKER , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:13

- CR

- 261

- 1

Before JONES , SOUTHWICK , and COSTA , Circuit Judges

. PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Casey Luker has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Luker h a s not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED December 1 5 , 2015 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 15-40311 Document: 00513307992 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/15/2015No. 15

- 40311

2 appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the
APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Case: 15-40311 Document: 00513307992 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/15/2015
Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2015-3820 ☐ These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2014-SW-024-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: ☒ FRAN ☐ SNPRM

☒ No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

No Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? 

If yes, list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the 

previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point 

for guidance. Latest Revision.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: Choose one.

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): Click here to enter text.

What change to the AD action is requested? Click here to enter text.

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Click here to enter text.

Do we agree? Yes/No 

If YES, we agree because Insert justification Make the following changes to the AD: List any 

changes to the AD

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with Insert text because Insert justification We disagree with

Insert text because Insert justification Make the following changes to the AD: List any 

changes to the AD

If NO, we don’t agree because Insert our rationale

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: Choose one.

If other, explain: Click here to enter text.

Commenter(s): Click here to enter text.

What change to the AD action is requested? Click here to enter text.
Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Click here to enter text.

Do we agree? Yes/No 

If YES, we agree because Insert justification Make the following changes to the AD: List any 

changes to the AD

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with Insert text because Insert justification We disagree with

Insert text because Insert justification Make the following changes to the AD: List any 

changes to the AD

If NO, we don’t agree because Insert our rationale

For additional issues, double-click here
**Exhibit 31.2****CERTIFICATIONS**I, Marvin G. Kiser, Sr., certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of McRae Industries, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) forthe registrant and have:a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;andc) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: October 28, 2005   /s/ Marvin G. Kiser, Sr.  Marvin G. Kiser, Sr.  Vice President of Finance  
53
Materials Not Included in

Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket

Docket Number: FAA- 2010-1197

Directorate Identifier: 2010NM044AD

SIL 54-035, R01 ---7/9/10

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the 

Supplemental AD Docket

MAY BE VIEWED AT: Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate

Rules Docket

1601 Lind Ave. SW.,

Renton, WA 98057

425.227.1221

DURING THE HOURS OF: 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays.

Form Date: 03/05/2008

Express Evaluation Express Evaluation Express Evaluation Express Evaluation Express Evaluation Express Evaluation Express Evaluation Express Evaluation Express Evaluation Express Evaluation Express Evaluation

EVALUATION: Express Server

EVALUATION: Conversion Package
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, June 03, 2015.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of

the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, June 03, 2015

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A15A1700. PINEDA REO, LLC. v. PREF CHARLOTTE PARTNERS I, LLC. et al..

Upon consideration of the APPELLANT'S motion FOR PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW

THE APPEAL in the above styled case, it is ordered that the motion is hereby GRANTED.
#### SUZANNE M. SEARLES *v.*BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE TOWN OF WEST HARTFORD

(13880)

Spear, Hennessy and Freedman, Js.

Argued December 6, 1995

decision released January 9, 1996

*Suzanne M. Searles,*pro se, the appellant (plaintiff).

*Elizabeth Dee Bailey,*assistant corporation counsel, for the appellee (defendant).

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed.