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

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 230 (Friday, November 29, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 94782]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-27961]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: November 29, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
November 22, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 785 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-488, K2025-485.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-27961 Filed 11-27-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Starlight Flights: USS Tripoli and its Embarked Aircraft Go Nocturnal

By Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Peter BurghartUSS Tripoli (LHA 7) Public Affairs

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

More
No. 82-971.

#### Holway *v.*Smith.

Sup. Ct. Va. Certio-rari denied.
Opinion issued May 21, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-13-00400-CV

———————————

IN RE KATHERINE LOUSIE KING, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Katherine Louise King, has filed a motion to dismiss her petition for 

writ of mandamus. Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus asserted that the trial 

court had failed to rule on her challenge to its subject-matter jurisdiction while 

“entertain[ing] and decid[ing] substantive matters in the case, despite repeated 

requests from Relator for a ruling on her amended plea to the jurisdiction.”1

 

 1 The underlying case is In the Matter of Marriage of Katherine Louise King and 

Christopher Michael King and In the Interest of R.A.K., a Child, No. 2011-23444, 
2

Relator states in her motion to dismiss that she has now received a written order 

from the trial court denying her plea to the jurisdiction. 

Accordingly, we grant Relator’s motion and dismiss her petition for writ of 

mandamus. 

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Bland, and Massengale.

 

 

in the 311th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Deborah Pratt 

presiding.
#### In the Matter of DEE’S RESORT WEAR, INC. a/k/a Dee’s a/k/a Dee’s Sportswear a/k/a Dee’s Dress Shop, Debtor.

Bankruptcy No. 81-883.

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division.

Dec. 15, 1982.

Lawrence Kleinfeld, St. Petersburg, Fla., for trustee.

John E. Watson, St. Petersburg, Fla., for debtor.

ORDER ON APPLICATION FOR ORDER TO DETERMINE REASONABLE ATTORNEY’S FEES

ALEXANDER L. PASKAY, Chief Judge.

THIS CAUSE came on for hearing upon the Application for Order to Determine Reasonable Attorneys Fee, filed by the Trustee for the above-named Debtor. The Trustee requests that this Court review the fee of $5,000 which was paid to the Debtor’s attorney, John E. Watson, prior to the filing of the Debtor’s petition for relief.

The Debtor filed a Petition for Relief under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code on May 20, 1981. In response to the Trustee’s Application, the attorney for the Debtor filed an Affidavit with detailed schedules of the time devoted to the case and the services rendered by the attorney himself and by his law clerk. The Affidavit and attached schedules show that the attorney expended 18 hours and 5 minutes on the case prior to the filing of the petition and 5 hours in post-petition services of this time, approximately two hours and five minutes of the pre-petition services, and two hours of post-petition time were spent in telephonic calls and correspondence. The attor*592ney’s law clerk expended 22 hours, 18 minutes pre-petition and 39 hours, 23 minutes post-petition. Approximately 1 hour and 18 minutes of his prepetition services, and 5 hours and 53 minutes of • his postpetition time was spent in telephone calls and correspondence. In addition, there is listed on both the attorney’s and the law clerk’s schedules 8 hours spent in conference together reviewing pleadings and correspondence between February 3, 1981 and September 30, 1981. The attorney contends that the total of 100 hours and 46 minutes warrants a fee of $6,675.50. The Disclosure of Compensation filed together with the Petition for Relief reflects that $5,000 was paid prior to the date of filing and' an additional $5,000 was promised forthcoming.

Much of the itemization of telephone and correspondence time does not reveal the nature or substance of the phone calls or correspondence. Furthermore, many of the services seem routine and ministerial. As such, this time should be compensated at a lower rate than truly legal services, regardless of the experience and competency of the party performing the services. *In re Doyle-Lunstra Sales Corp.,*19 B.R. 1003, 6 C.B.C.2d 1330 (D.C.D.S.D.1982).

The Court having considered the record, and arguments of counsel, it is

ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Application for Order to Determine Reasonable Attorney’s Fee be, and the same hereby is, granted and a reasonable fee for the services performed is determined to be $3500.00. It is further

ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the attorney for the Debtor, John E. Watson be, and the same hereby is, directed to remit the excess amount, to-wit: $1500.00, to the Trustee within 15 days from the date of the entry of this Order.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-7113

DEMETRIUS LYDELL BRYANT,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

WARDEN ERIC D. WILSON,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, 

Chief District Judge. (5:12-hc-02309-D)

Submitted: October 22, 2013 Decided: October 25, 2013

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Demetrius Lydell Bryant, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Demetrius Lydell Bryant seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction 

his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. We dismiss the appeal for 

lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely 

filed. 

Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of 

the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, 

Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends 

the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the 

appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely 

filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional 

requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket 

on June 6, 2013. The notice of appeal was filed on July 10, 

2013.* Because Bryant failed to file a timely notice of appeal 

or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we 

deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. 

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

 *

For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date 

appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could 

have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to 

the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 

(1988).
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
NUMBER 13

- 10

- 00 196

- CR



### COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

- EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

RAUL ROBLES

- ESCOBAR

, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 13 8th District Court

of Cameron County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices B enavides and Vela

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Raul Robles

- Escobar , by and through his attorney, has filed a motion to

dismiss his appeal because he no longer desires to prosecute it. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P

.

42.2(a). Without passing on the merits of the case, we grant the motion to dismiss

pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.2(a) and dismiss the appeal. Having

dismissed the appeal at appellant's request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained,2

and our mandate will issue forthwith.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 47.2(b).

D elivered and filed the

27th day of May, 2010

.
<!--/* //NOSONAR */-->
<!--/* //NOSONAR */--><html  lang="en-US">
<head id="Head"><meta id="MetaDescription" name="DESCRIPTION" /><meta id="MetaKeywords" name="KEYWORDS" /><meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width,initial-scale=1" /><title>
	Readout of Acting Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Sasha Baker's Meeting With Australian Secretary of the Department of Defence Greg Moriarty
</title><link id="css3605" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/DesktopModules/ArticleCS/module.css" /><link id="css4870" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/desktopmodules/ArticleCS/styles/Joint/style.css" /></head>
<body>
    <main>
    <div>
    <div class="aprint news">
    <div class="header">
        <img height="100" class="print-logo" alt="Site Logo" src="/Portals/55/INDOPACOM2018_100x100.png?ver=J6xEsvouw9aaqHcHjhoIIQ%3d%3d" />

        <h1 class="title">Readout of Acting Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Sasha Baker's Meeting With Australian Secretary of the Department of Defence Greg Moriarty</h1>
    </div>
    

    <div> <span class="date">/ Published Jan. 19, 2024</span></div>
    <span class="dateline-text"></span>
    <p><span style="font-size:larger;">Department of Defense Spokesman Lt. Col. David Herndon provided the following readout:</span></p>

<p><span style="font-size:larger;">Acting Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Sasha Baker met with Australian Secretary of the Department of Defence Greg Moriarty at the Pentagon today to discuss growing defense and security cooperation between the United States and Australia.</span></p>

<p><span style="font-size:larger;">Against the backdrop of unprecedented momentum for the "Unbreakable Alliance," the two officials emphasized their commitment to further deepen defense cooperation, including through defense technology collaboration, force posture initiatives, and the trilateral AUKUS partnership with the United Kingdom.</span></p>

<p><span style="font-size:larger;">They affirmed the ironclad alliance between the United States and Australia and committed to continue their cooperation with regional allies and partners toward a shared vision of a free and open Indo-Pacific.</span></p>
<br />
</div>
    </div>
    </main>
</body>
</html>
**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 Prana Biotechnology Limited (the “Company”)
      on Form 20-F/A for the period ending June 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Geoffrey P.
      Kempler, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
      § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 result of operations of the Company.




/s/ Geoffrey
              P. Kempler*Geoffrey
                P. KemplerChief
                Executive Officer




June
      18,
      2007




*  The
      originally executed copy of this Certification will be maintained at the
      Company’s offices and will be made available for inspection upon
      request.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 
-  JTF-Micronesia		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

# Young Tigers Soar in Pack, a First for Pacific Air Forces 

By Staff Sgt. Micaiah Anthony18th Wing Public Affairs

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

More News
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 906 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

Pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned certifies that this periodicreport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in thisperiodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of Advent Software, Inc.

 

 
|   | August 6,  2009 | /s/  Stephanie G. DiMarco                                    |
|--------|----------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                 | Stephanie  G. DiMarco                                        |
|   |                 | Principal  Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer |

 

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to Advent Software, Inc. and will be retained by Advent Software, Inc.and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff uponrequest.

 

----
#### Mathews & McKinnish *v.*Wm. Moore & Claiborn Harris.

From Cumberland.

Judgment set aside upon motion for irregularity. Judgments confessed before tlie Clerk, where there is no Court, are irregular, and will be set aside upon motion. The rendering of a judgment, is a judicial act to be done by tlie Court only.

This was a motion, to set aside a judgment for irregularity. A writ was sued out at the instance of the Plaintiffs against the Defendants, returnable to the Superior Court of Law, for Cumberland County, at Spring term 1811, the service of which was acknowledged by the Defendants on the 4th March, 1811, and the following endorsement was made:

*■ Service acknowledged 4th March 1811,

“ WM. MOORE,

« *Teste, “*C. HARRIS.

*“ V.*McIstire.

“Judgment confessed by the Defendants in person, agreeably to the specialties filed. Any credits that shall appear on statement between tlie Plaintiffs and William Moore, to he admitted. Stay of execution six months.

“ WM. MOORE, ■

*“*C. HARRIS.”

Afterwards, during the week appointed by law, for holding the Court in April, 1811, tlie Clerk entered up jndgtnent agreeably to,this endorsement^ and when six months liad expired, he issued execution for the debt and costs. William Moore, one of the Defendants, applied to one of the Judges for a writ of supersedeas, and made an affidavit, setting forth, *“*that sometime in the week assigned by law for holding the Superior Court in the County of Cumberland, in the spring of 1811, be and Claiborn Harris confessed a judgment before the Clerk of said Court, to Mathews and McKinnish for the sum. ef ¿6450 or thereabouts, with costs. That there was no *182Superior Court holden for the County of Cumberland, in the spring of that year, by reason of the indisposition of the late Judge Wright ; and that he was advised the saj(j jui]g-ment was irregular and ought to be set aside.” A supersedeas was awarded, and at the next term of the Court, the judgment was set aside, and the Plaintiffs therein appealed.

Haii Judge,

delivered the opinion of the Court:— It cannot be seriously contended, that the judgment in this case is regular and legal. What authority has the clerk to enter up judgment where there is no Court ? It is his business to record the proceedings of the Court; but the rendering of a judgment, is a judicial act, to be done by the Court only. The judgment is irregular and must be set aside.
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 230 (Friday, November 29, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 94778]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-27904]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: November 29, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
November 15, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 743 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-429, K2025-426.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-27904 Filed 11-27-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
Exhibit 23.1





Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm





We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (File Nos. 333-148982 and 333-164563, including a base prospectus dated April 16, 2010 and a prospectus supplement dated September 29, 2010) of Zion Oil & Gas, Inc. of our report dated April 15, 2005 (except for the first paragraph in Note 1C as to which the date is July 26, 2006) relating to our audits of the financial statements, which appear in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Zion Oil & Gas, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2010.





We also consent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Experts” in the Prospectus, which is part of the Registration Statement.





/s/ Lane Gorman Trubitt, PLLC.





Dallas, Texas


March 16, 2011