alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 

### Hunt, Jeff

From: Pfleckl, Celia Ann H [CeliaAnn.Pfleckl@amtrak.com] Sent: Friday, March 25, 2011 1:20 PM To: sclo461@ECY.WA.gov Subject: Fuel Use by County for 2008 - Amtrak Attachments: Line Haul Fuel Consumption_Washington_2008_Final.xls

Ms. ClouseAttached is a spreadsheet with the requested information. There is a summary table in yellow to the left of the calculations. Please do not hesitate to contact me sh ould you have any questions regarding this submission. Best, Celia

Celia Ann H. Pfleckl Senior Environmental Engineer National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) 40 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20002 Office: 202-906-3019 Mobile: 703-254-6236 Fax: 202-906-3439
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 241 (Friday, December 14, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74481-74482]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-30179]

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

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK

[Public Notice 2012-0547]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Final Collection; 
Comment Request

AGENCY: Export-Import Bank of the U.S.

ACTION: Submission for OMB review and comments request.

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

    Form Title: EIB 99-17 Enhanced Assignment of Policy Proceeds.

SUMMARY: The Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank), as a 
part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent 
burden, invites the general public and other Federal Agencies to 
comment on the proposed information collection, as required by the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
    The form represents the exporter's directive to Ex-Im Bank to whom 
and

[[Page 74482]]

where the insurance proceeds should be sent, and also describes the 
duties and obligations that have to be met by the financial institution 
in order to share in the policy proceeds. The form is typically part of 
the documentation required by financial institution lenders in order to 
provide financing of an exporter's foreign accounts receivable. Foreign 
accounts receivable insured by Ex-Im Bank represent stronger collateral 
to secure the financing. By recording which policyholders have 
completed this form, Ex-Im Bank is able to determine how many of its 
exporter policyholders require Ex-Im Bank insurance policies to support 
lender financing.
    The form can be viewed at www.exim.gov/pub/pending/eib99-17.pdf.

DATES: Comments should be received on or before February 12, 2013 to be 
assured of consideration.

ADDRESSES: Comments maybe submitted electronically on 
www.regulations.gov or by mail to Arnold Chow, Export Import Bank of 
the United States, 811 Vermont Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20571.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Titles and Form Number: EIB 99-17 Enhanced Assignment of Policy 
Proceeds.
    OMB Number: 3048-xxxx.
    Type of Review: New.
    Need and Use: This collection of information is used by exporters 
to convey legal rights to, and describe the duties and obligations that 
have to be met by their financial institution lender in order to share 
insurance policy proceeds from Ex-Im Bank approved insurance claims. 
Affected Public: This form affects entities involved in the export of 
U.S goods and services.
    Annual Number of Respondents: 15.
    Estimated Time per Respondent: 15 minutes.
    Number of forms reviewed by Ex-Im Bank: 15.
    Government Annual Burden Hours: 15 hours.
    Government Cost: $620.
    Frequency of Reporting or Use: Annually.

Sharon A. Whitt,
Agency Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 2012-30179 Filed 12-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6690-01-P
```
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 97-50282 Summary Calendar

_____________________

ARTHUR B. CHAUSMER, M.D., Ph.D.,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER, ET AL.,

Defendants,

PAT CAMPBELL, Individually and in His Official Capacity,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Western District of Texas USDC No. MO-96-CV-132

_________________________________________________________________ December 4, 1997 Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Pat Campbell, in his individual capacity, appeals the denial

of his summary judgment motion.

To the extent that the denial of summary judgment, based on a

defendant’s assertion of qualified immunity, turns on an issue of

law, we have jurisdiction despite the absence of a final judgment.-2-

Southard v. Texas Bd. of Crim. Justice

, 114 F.3d 539, 548 (5th Cir.

1997). Campbell argues that Chausmer does not have a

constitutionally cognizable prop erty or liberty interest in the

settlement agreement; Chausmer’s due process contentions merely

present a breach of contract claim; even if Chausmer had a

constitutionally viable interest, the constitutional right

allegedly violated was not clearly established; and Campbell’s

actions were objectively reasonable. We have carefully reviewed

the arguments and the appellate record. We conclude that Chausmer

failed to allege the violation of a cognizable interest under the

Due Process Clause, let alone alleging the violation of clearly

established constitutional law. S ee Vander Zee v. Reno
, 73 F.3d

1365, 1368-71 (5th Cir. 1996). Thus, the district court erred in

denying Campbell judgment on the federal law claims in the light of

Campbell being qualifiedly immune.

Campbell also argues that the district court erred in denying

summary judgment on the state l aw claim of fraud in the light of

his defense of official immunity. Although asserted in his answer,

Campbell did not raise the defense of official immunity in his

motion for summary judgment, and the district court’s order denying

summary judgment did not refer to it. Therefore, we lack

jurisdiction to consider Campbell’s argument. S ee Cantu v. Rocha

,
77 F.3d 795, 804 (5th Cir. 1996).-3-

F or the foregoing reasons, we REVERSE the district court’s

order to the extent that summary judgment was denied to Campbell,

in his individual capacity, on the federal law claims. We REMAND

the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

REVERSED and REMANDED.
|                                                                                                         
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                         
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                           
|View History: Annual                                                                                     
|View History: Annual                                                                                     
|View History:                                                                                            
|                                                                                                         
|Texas - RRC District 5 Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Reserves Divestitures (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                         
|                                                                                                         
|Texas - RRC District 5 Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Reserves Divestitures (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                         

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 32     | 23     | 378    | 339    | 298    | 350    | 664    | 23     | 657    | 32    
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 1      | 10,687 | 539    | 94     | 623    | 1,090  | 2,638  | 348    | 1,522  | 291   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 359    | 420    |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CEO 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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Newcastle Investment Corp. (the ‘‘Company’’) for the annual period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the ‘‘Report’’), Kenneth M. Riis, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, 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 his knowledge:

| |     |                                                                                                                      
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

| |     |                                                                                                                                                     
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

/s/Kenneth M. Riis
Kenneth M. Riis
Chief Executive Officer
February 29, 2008

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
Exhibit 15



May 3, 2002

Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, Northwest
Washington, D.C.  20549
Attention:  Document Control

Commissioners:

We are aware that our report dated April 23, 2002, on
our review of condensed consolidated interim financial
information of 7-Eleven, Inc. and Subsidiaries (the
"Company") as of and for the three months ended March
31, 2002, and included in the Company's quarterly
report on Form 10-Q for the quarter then ended, is
incorporated by reference in the following Registration
Statements:


                                         REGISTRATION NO.
                                         ----------------
On Form S-8 for:

  7-Eleven, Inc. 1995 Stock
    Incentive Plan                            33-63617

  7-Eleven, Inc. Supplemental
     Executive Retirement Plan for
     Eligible Employees                      333-42731

  7-Eleven, Inc. Stock Compensation
    Plan for Non-Employee Directors          333-68491


Very truly yours,

PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP
Dallas, Texas





                                  Tab 2
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

MALAKIA ANTON JACKSON,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 507 MAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 20th day of March, 2024, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                       4,101,822
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  374,422
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,672,183
<PP&E>                                         668,456
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              23,383,603
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          777,599
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                 12,759,980
<COMMON>                                        14,376
<OTHER-SE>                                   9,831,648
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                23,383,603
<SALES>                                        509,838
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               509,838
<CGS>                                          170,261
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,201,275
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,628,876)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,628,876)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.13)


</TABLE>
|                                                                                     
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                     
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                       
|View History: Annual                                                                 
|View History: Annual                                                                 
|View History:                                                                        
|                                                                                     
|Texas State Offshore Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                     
|                                                                                     
|Texas State Offshore Dry Natural Gas Reserves Revision Decreases (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                     

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1980's                                                                                                                            |        | 58     | 204    |        |        |        | 55     | 96     | 49     | 63    
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 82     | 66     | 85     | 35     | 44     | 91     | 20     | 34     | 77     | 113   
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 71     | 25     | 67     | 89     | 206    | 35     | 35     | 23     | 35     | 22    
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 56     | 66     | 11     | 19     | 22     | 5      | 17     | 31     | 4      | 1     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
#### SELLMAN v. STATE.

No. 22500.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 12, 1943.

C. F. Sentell, of Snyder, for appellant.

Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

Conviction is for selling whiskey in a “dry area”, punishment being a fine of one hundred dollars.

The record contains neither statement of facts nor bills of exception. In such condition nothing is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-7439

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

DAVID HILL,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at

Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:01-cr-00191-CMH-1)

Submitted: May 25, 2023 Decided: May 31, 2023

Before AGEE and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David Hill, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 22-7439 Doc: 12 Filed: 05/31/2023 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

David Hill, a federal inmate, appeals the district court’s order issuing a prefiling 

injunction in his criminal proceeding. Upon review of the record in conjunction with the 

arguments pressed on appeal, we conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in 

issuing the injunction. See Cromer v. Kraft Foods N. Am., Inc., 390 F.3d 812, 817-18 (4th 

Cir. 2004) (stating standard of review and providing four-factor test). Accordingly, we 

affirm the district court’s order. United States v. Hill, No. 1:01-cr-00191-CMH-1 (E.D. 

Va. Nov. 30, 2022). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 22-7439 Doc: 12 Filed: 05/31/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5627 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on lutetium oxide. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 8, 2012 

Mr. PAUL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on lutetium 

oxide. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LUTETIUM OXIDE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.10.78 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 lutetium oxide) is amended by striking the date in the ef7 fective period column and inserting ‘‘12/31/2015’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5627 IH

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

2 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
**                                                             **BANGLA PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, INC.**                                                             **

**Exhibit 31.1 - Certifications**I, Shawn Erickson, certify that:			1.    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-KSB of Bangla Property Management, Inc.;			2.     Based on my knowledge, this report on Form 10-KSB 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 Registration Statement on Form 10-KSB, 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.     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 I 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 quarterly 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 quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and				        c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5.   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.  I have indicated in this quarterly 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: June 30, 2005			/s/ Shawn Erickson 			Shawn Erickson, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer			President & Director of Bangla Property Management, Inc.

----

10KSB – Period Ending March 31, 2005                         Bangla Property Management, Inc.                      Page 32

----