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

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5512 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.5512

                      One Hundred Twelfth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
            the third day of January, two thousand and twelve

                                 An Act

 
 To amend title 28, United States Code, to realign divisions within two 
                           judicial districts.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
    This Act may be cited as the ``Divisional Realignment Act of 
2012''.
SEC. 2. REALIGNMENT WITHIN THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI.
    Section 105(a) of title 28, United States Code, is amended--
        (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``Iron,'' and ``Saint 
    Genevieve,''; and
        (2) in paragraph (3)--
            (A) by inserting ``Iron,'' after ``Dunklin,''; and
            (B) by inserting ``Saint Genevieve,'' after ``Ripley,''.
SEC. 3. REALIGNMENT WITHIN THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI.
    Section 104 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by striking 
subsection (a) and inserting the following:
    ``(a) The northern district comprises three divisions.
        ``(1) The Aberdeen Division comprises the counties of Alcorn, 
    Chickasaw, Choctaw, Clay, Itawamba, Lee, Lowndes, Monroe, 
    Oktibbeha, Prentiss, Tishomingo, Webster, and Winston.
        ``Court for the Aberdeen Division shall be held at Aberdeen, 
    Ackerman, and Corinth.
        ``(2) The Oxford Division comprises the counties of Benton, 
    Calhoun, DeSoto, Lafayette, Marshall, Panola, Pontotoc, Quitman, 
    Tallahatchie, Tate, Tippah, Tunica, Union, and Yalobusha.
        ``Court for the Oxford Division shall be held at Oxford.
        ``(3) The Greenville Division comprises the counties of Attala, 
    Bolivar, Carroll, Coahoma, Grenada, Humphreys, Leflore, Montgomery, 
    Sunflower, and Washington.
        ``Court for the Greenville Division shall be held at 
    Clarksdale, Cleveland, and Greenville.''.
SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.
    The amendments made by this Act take effect on the 60th day after 
the date of the enactment of this Act.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
|                                                                                                               
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                               
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                                 
|View History: Annual                                                                                           
|View History: Annual                                                                                           
|View History:                                                                                                  
|                                                                                                               
|No chart available.                                                                                            
|No chart available.                                                                                            
|                                                                                                               
|                                                                                                               
|Calif--Coastal Region Onshore Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves Increases (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                                               

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0     
|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
#### ROLAND v. STATE.

No. 23356.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 22, 1946.

Chas. H. Dean, of Plainview, for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of an assault with intent to murder, and his punishment *560assessed at confinement in the State penitentiary for a term of one year.

The record is before this court without a statement of facts or bills of exceptions, in the absence of which no question has been presented for review. The indictment and all matters of procedure appear to be in regular form.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 196 (Tuesday, October 10, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 60171]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-25956]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[I.D.092600A]


Marine Mammals; File No. 373-1575

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Issuance of permit.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that Point Reyes Bird Observatory (Dr. 
Sarah Allen, Principal Investigator) 4990 Shoreline Highway, Stinson 
Beach, CA 94970, has been issued a permit to take harbor seals (Phoca 
vitulina richardsi), northern elephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris), 
California sea lions (Zalophus californianus), and Steller sea lions 
(Eumetopias jubatus) for purposes of scientific research.

ADDRESSES: The permit and related documents are available for review 
upon written request or by appointment in the following office(s):
    Permits and Documentation Division, Office of Protected Resources, 
NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910 (301/
713-2289);
    Regional Administrator, Southwest Region, NMFS, 501 West Ocean 
Blvd., Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802 (562/980-4001); and
    Regional Administrator, Northwest Region, NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way 
NE, BIN C15700, Bldg. 1, Seattle, WA 98115 (206/526-6150).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Simona Roberts or Ruth Johnson, 301/
713-2289.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 11, 2000, notice was published in 
the Federal Register 65 FR 42676) that a request for a scientific 
research permit to take harbor seals (Phoca vitulina richardsi), 
northern elephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris), California sea lions 
(Zalophus californianus), and Steller sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus) 
had been submitted by the above-named organization. The requested 
permit has been issued under the authority of the Marine Mammal 
Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), the 
Regulations Governing the Taking and Importing of Marine Mammals (50 
CFR part 216), the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), and the regulations governing the taking, 
importing, and exporting of endangered and threatened species (50 CFR 
parts 222-226).
    Issuance of this permit, as required by the ESA, was based on a 
finding that such permit (1) was applied for in good faith, (2) will 
not operate to the disadvantage of the endangered species which is the 
subject of this permit, and (3) is consistent with the purposes and 
policies set forth in section 2 of the ESA.

    Dated: October 3, 2000.
Ann D. Terbush,
Chief, Permits and Documentation Division, Office of Protected 
Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 00-25956 Filed 10-6-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S
#### In re B. R. WILLIAMS.

No. 21713.

Kansas City Court of Appeals. Missouri.

Aug. 5, 1954.

Henry C. Salveter, Sedalia, informant.

Lane B. Henderson, Shelbina, William M. Stringer, Moberly, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

This disbarment proceeding against B. R. Williams, a member of the bar of this state, hereinafter referred to as respondent, was instituted by the Advisory Committee of The Missouri Bar. The information was filed in this court, charging the respondent with being guilty of professional misconduct and unlawful conduct as a member of the bar. Thereafter, respondent filed an answer, in effect, denying any intentional wrongdoing. 'This court appoited Honorable William T. Bellamy, an attorney of Marshall, Missouri, as Special Commissioner to hear the evidence and report his findings and recommendations to this court. Several witnesses, including respondent, testified at the hearing before the Special Commissioner; and by stipulation the transcript of the testimony given before the Advisory Committee prior to the filing of the information was admitted in evidence. The Commissioner filed his report wherein the facts and the applicable law are fully discussed and analyzed. Respondent filed exceptions to that report.

Pending a final disposition of the case by this court, the respondent, B. R. Williams, died. Under such circumstances, it is unnecessary to recite the charges of professional misconduct contained in the information or the facts introduced in evidence.

The purpose of the filing of the information was to revoke the license of the respondent to practice law, or to administer proper disciplinary action against him for the alleged misconduct. His untimely death removes the necessity for any further action on the Commissioner’s report. The questions at issue have become moot. For this reason, the cause is dismissed.

The allowance of costs and expenses and the assessment thereof is provided for in a separate order entered as of this date.

All concur.
----

| Exhibit      32.2                                         |
|-----------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                      |
| CERTIFICATION      OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO |
| 18      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,                              |
| AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO                               |
| SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002         |

|                      |                         |
|---------------------------|------------------------------|
|                      | /s/      David K. Holeman    |
|                      | David      K. Holeman        |
|                      | Chief      Financial Officer |
|                      |                         |
| Date:      March 16, 2009 |                         |
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**380 CA 10-01581**  PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., CARNI, GREEN, AND GORSKI, JJ.

KEVIN T. STOCKER, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

2900 TRANSIT ROAD LLC, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

THE GARAS LAW FIRM, LLP, BUFFALO (JOHN C. GARAS OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

KEVIN T. STOCKER, TONAWANDA, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT PRO SE.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (John A. Michalek, J.), entered March 10, 2010. The order, insofar as appealed from, directed the Erie County Comptroller to distribute surplus funds to the members of defendant corporation.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order insofar as appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs and the motion is denied in part in accordance with the following Memorandum: Defendant corporation was formed for the purpose of “acquiring, developing, operating, leasing and otherwise dealing in real estate, specifically 6024 Main Street, Williamsville, New York.” Defendant executed a mortgage with respect to that property, which was subsequently acquired by plaintiff, a member of defendant. Plaintiff commenced the instant mortgage foreclosure action when defendant defaulted on the mortgage and, following the foreclosure sale, surplus funds were deposited with the Erie County Comptroller (Comptroller) by agreement of the parties. Plaintiff thereafter moved, inter alia, for an order dissolving defendant corporation and directing the Comptroller to distribute the surplus funds pursuant to defendant’s Operating Agreement.

As limited by its brief, defendant corporation contends that Supreme Court erred in granting that part of plaintiff’s motion seeking an order directing the Comptroller to distribute the surplus funds to the members of defendant corporation in proportion to their membership interests. We agree. The surplus funds resulting from the foreclosure sale belong to defendant corporation ( see First Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn. of Rochester v Brown , 78 AD2d 119, 123, appeal dismissed 53 NY2d 939).

Entered: March 25, 2011 Patricia L. Morgan Clerk of the Court
<PAGE>

Exhibit 10.11.7      Quaker City Bank Change in Control Agreement Renewal and
                     Extension Acknowledgment between Quaker City Bank and
                     Robert C. Teeling dated July 1, 2001.



                                QUAKER CITY BANK
                          CHANGE IN CONTROL AGREEMENT
                      RENEWAL AND EXTENSION ACKNOWLEDGMENT



Name of Participant:              Robert C. Teeling
                    ---------------------------------------------------------





The undersigned participant does hereby acknowledge that, at their regularly
scheduled meeting  on

June 21, 2001, the Board of Directors of Quaker City Bank acted to renew and
extend the Quaker City Bank Change in Control Agreement with the undersigned
participant to a full twenty-four (24) month term, until June 30, 2003.


Dated this ___1st___ day of ____July____, A.D., ______2001_______.



                              QUAKER CITY BANK


  /s/ Robert C. Teeling        By:  /s/ Frederic R. McGill
-------------------------         --------------------------
Participant                       President
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.                  

###### Federal Election Commission

# Previously Announced Date & Time:

Thursday, October 12, 2000, 10 a.m., meeting open to the public.

The following items were added to the agenda:

Status of Regulations—October 2000 Monthly Update

Conference Planning Procurement Recommendation

# Date & Time:

Tuesday, October 17, 2000 at 10 a.m.

# Place:

999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC.

# Status:

This meeting will be closed to the public.

# Items to be discussed:

Compliance matters pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 437g.

Audits conducted pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 437g, 438(b), and Title 26, U.S.C.

Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceedings or arbitration.

Internal personnel rules and procedures or matters affecting a particular employee.

# Date & Time:

Thursday, October 19, 2000 at 10 a.m.

# Place:

999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC (ninth floor)

# Status:

This meeting will be open to the public.

# Items to be discussed:

Correction and Approval of Minutes.

                        Draft Advisory Opinion 2000-29: The Honorable W.J. “Billy” Tauzin, United States House of Representatives, joined by House Members: Richard H. Baker, John Cooksey, Jim McCrery, David Vitter, William Jefferson, Chris John, and by Senators John Breaux and Mary Landrieu.                              ( print page 60669)    

Dole for President, Inc.—Statement of Reasons (LRA#467).

Dole/Kemp '96, Inc.—Statement of Reasons (LRA#506).

Administrative Matters.

# Person to contact for information:

Mr. Ron Harris, Press Officer, telephone: (202) 694-1220.

Mary W. Dove,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-26358  Filed 10-10-00; 1:32 pm]

BILLING CODE 6715-01-M
Exhibit 13.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT

TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Randgold Resources Limited (the
Company) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, D. Mark Bristow, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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/ D. Mark Bristow    
|D. Mark Bristow        
|Chief Executive Officer
|March 28, 2013
Exhibit 32.2  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Annual Report of Gold Billion Group Holdings Limited (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014 (the Report), I, Kok Seng Yeap Eddy, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 1) The Report fully complies with the requirement 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 Company's financial position and results of operations. Date: August 27, 2015 /s/ Kok Seng Yeap Eddy
 Chief Financial Officer
1 

### Werner, Christopher

From: Szabo, Aaron <Aaron_L_Szabo@omb.eop.gov> Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 5:50 PM To: Lorang, Phil; Werner, Christopher; Beaver, Melinda Cc: Szabo, Aaron Subject: Summary of Additional Interagency Comments under EO 12866 and 13563: EPA NPRM -- Protection of Visibility: Amendments to Requirem ents for State Plans (RIN 2060- AS55) Attachments: Summary of Interagency Comments_EO12866_13563_03_08 _2016 NPRM with OMB c....docx; Summary of Interagency Comments_EO12866_ 13563_RH NPRM SMP aspect 03 _09_2....docx; Summary of Interagency Comments_EO12 866_13563_Additional Comments_031020....docx; Summary of Interagency Com ments_EO12866_13563_RH NPRM Rx fire multi-year....docx
Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed
Categories: Regional Haze



### Attached please find the summary of additional inte ragency comments under EO 12866 and 13563 for the d raft proposed rule entitled, Protection of Visibility: Amendments to Requirement s for State Plans (RIN 2060-AS55). The interagency comments are based on the most recent i nformation provided to OMB for review. Please hav e EPA schedule a teleconference from 2pm – 3:00pm tomorro w afternoon to discuss these comments with interage ncy reviewers in further detail.

Thank you and please let me know if you have any co mments or questions.

Aaron L. Szabo Policy Analyst Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs Office of Management and Budget 202-395-3621 Aaron_L_Szabo@omb.eop.gov
#### Joseph L. Simon, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Kathleen Simon, Deceased, et al., Plaintiffs, v Massapequa General Hospital et al., Defendants, and David L. Dreizen, D.O., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant. Ross Friedman, Third-Party Defendant-Respondent.

In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice and wrongful death, etc., the defendant third-party plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (McCabe, J.), dated May 19, 1989, which denied his motion to compel the third-party defendant to answer enumerated questions posed to him at an examination before trial.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.

"An order denying a motion to compel a witness to answer questions propounded at an examination before trial is akin to a ruling made in the course of the examination itself and as such is not appealable as of right *(see, Sainz v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp.,*106 AD2d 500; *Roberts v Modica,*102 AD2d 886; *Aronofsky v Marine Park Chiropractic Center,*81 *534AD2d 570)” *(Ewell v Moore,*133 AD2d 67). Nor are we inclined to grant leave to parties who have taken it upon themselves to perfect an appeal without having applied to this court for leave to appeal. Thompson, J. P., Brown, Kunzeman and Eiber, JJ., concur.
| Date   | November      6, 2008 |   | /S/      Douglas A. Starrett                         |
|--------|-----------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                  |   | Douglas      A. StarrettChief      Executive Officer |
|   |                  |   |                                                 |
| Date   | November      6, 2008 |   | /S/      Randall J. Hylek                            |
|   |                  |   | Randall      J. HylekChief      Financial Officer    |

----