alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### James S. Battle *v.*Blake & Grey Little, adm’rs of Grey Little.

From Edgecomb.

What is due diligence is a question of law, and where a guarantor was bound after a due course of law'ugairist the principal creditor, neglect to enter a judgment against bail after two *nihils*discharges him.

COVENANT upon a deed executed by the Defendants’ intestate, whereby he had assigned severa] notes to the Plaintiff, and bound himself “ for the money due on them provided said *Battle*failed to get it after a due course of law.” The breach assigned was ‘Ghat Use Plaintiff had failed to get, after a due course of law, the money called for in a note made isy one *John*Drummond,” which was one of those assigned by the deed on which the action was brought.

On the trial, the, record of a suit against *Drummond*on this bond was introduced, in which, after many continuances and much unnecessary delay, as was contended, by the Defendants, a judgment was obtained upon which a *ca, sa.*issued. After a return *oí non est inventus,*two writs of *scire Jadas*were issued, which-were both returned *nihil,,*when instead of faking judgment against the bail by default, a third was issued, upon which *Drummond ,*v as surrendered in discharge of his bail.

His honor Judge Martin, instructed the Jury that the Plaintiff was bound to that diligence which a prudent' man would use in his own business, and left it to them to say whether he had used that diligence or not. A verdict was returned for the Plaintiff, and the Defendants appealed.

*Gaston,*for the Defendants.

*Hogg,*contra.

*382Per Curiam.

We think whether due diligence had been used in endeavoring to collect the debt from *Drum-mond,*was a question of law, as it arose in this case.— We also think as the Plaintiff did not take judgment against *Drummond’s*bail upon the return of two writs of *sci.fa.*instead of issuing a third, he did not use that diligence which the case required. Let the judgment be reversed, and a new trial granted.
ADVISOR, March/April 1995 

Interesting Facts about Oil Spills 

 Just one quart of oil can contaminate up to a quarter million gallons of drinking water or cause an 

oil slick almost 2 acres in size. 

 Oil destroys the waterproofing and insulating properties of plumage in birds by disrupting the 

microscopic structure of the feathers. 

 Exposing the aerial portions of plants to petroleum products indirectly affects a plant's 

underground root system. Experimental evidence has showed that oil on vegetation reduces the 

oxygen diffusion out of both stems and roots. 

 Backyard mechanics dump more used oil into Michigan's environment each year than the Exxon 

Valdez spilled into Alaska's Prince William Sound. 

Return to the ADVISOR home page

Revised: May 10, 1996 

Maintained by Christine Manninen, manninen@glc.org

http://www.glc.org/docs/advisor/95/oil/dyk.html 

Great Lakes Commission

ADVISOR, March/April 95: Interesting Facts about Oil Spills Page 1 of 1

http://www.glc.org/docs/advisor/95/oil/dyk.html 11/10/2011
No. 90-6292.

#### Jackson *v.*Jabe, Warden.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Staff

#  Summary of the Uncertainty Analyses for the State-of-the-Art Reactor Consequence Analyses Project (NUREG-2254)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG-2254 (PDF – 10.36 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:**March 2022**Date Published:**October 2022Prepared by:S.T. Ghosh*, N.E. Bixler**, D. Brooks**, M.L. Dennis**,H. Esmaili*, C. Faucett**, R.O. Gauntt**, S. Haq*, T. Haskin**,A.G. Hathaway*, P.D. Mattie**, D. Osborn**, K.W. Ross**,K.C. Wagner***U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission**Sandia National Laboratories   P.O. Box 5800   Albuquerque, NM 87185S.Tina Ghosh, NRC Project ManagerOffice of Nuclear Regulatory ResearchU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionWashington, DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, with the assistance of Sandia National Laboratories, conducted three uncertainty analyses (UAs) from 2010 through 2019 as part of the State-of-the-Art Reactor Consequence Analyses (SOARCA) studies. The SOARCA project was initiated to leverage decades’ worth of research into severe accidents and apply modern analytical tools and techniques to develop a body of knowledge about the realistic consequences of severe nuclear reactor accidents. The original study focused on providing a "best estimate" evaluation for select scenarios. The SOARCA UAs extended this work to include an integrated evaluation and propagation of uncertainty through detailed accident progression, radiological release, and offsite health consequence modeling using the MELCOR and MACCS codes. As such, the first of the three UAs was a first-of-a-kind analysis. This report presents important results and insights as well as the methodology and scope of the three SOARCA UAs, including the UA results often of most interest in severe accident consequence and risk studies (i.e., cesium and iodine releases and offsite latent cancer fatality risk). This report also presents key insights into input variables and associated phenomena that most influenced variations in source term and offsite health consequences, as well as other observations on UA methodology.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Monday, October 17, 2022
EXHIBIT 23.1




January 13, 2011




El Capitan Precious Metals, Inc.


15225 N. 49th Street


Scottsdale, AZ 85254




Gentlemen:




The undersigned hereby consents to the reference to the undersigned in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of El Capitan Precious Metals, Inc. for the year ended September 30, 2010 (the “Annual Report”), including without limitation references in Item 2, to be filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.




I also confirm that I have read each of the references to me in the Annual Report and concur with such statements. In giving this consent, the undersigned does not admit that he is within the category of persons whose consent is required by Section 7 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission.




Sincerely,/s/ Clyde L. SmithClyde L. Smith, Ph.D.
**Exhibit 99.2**

 

ZORAN CORPORATION

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Zoran Corporation (the“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2002, as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Karl Schneider, Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)                                  TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                  Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Dated:   November 14, 2002 |                                                 |
|---------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------|
|                            |                                                 |
|                            |                                                 |
|                            | /s/ Karl Schneider                                   |   |
|                            | Karl Schneider                                       |
|                            | Vice President, Finance and  Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 15





November 11, 2002



Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549

RE:    Tollgrade Communications, Inc. and subsidiaries

     1). Form S-8 (Registration No. 333-4290 and Registration No. 333-83007)
1995 Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan and Individual Stock Options Granted
to Certain Directors and Employees Prior to the Adoption of the Plan

     2). Form  S-8 (Registration No. 333-52907 and Registration No. 333-55470)
1998 Employee Incentive Compensation Plan


Commissioners:

We are aware that our report dated October 14, 2002 on our review of interim
financial information of Tollgrade Communications, Inc. and subsidiaries as of
and for the three month and nine month periods ended September 28, 2002 and
included in the Company's quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter then
ended is incorporated by reference in the registration statements referred to
above.

Very truly yours,



/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
# L_2016067EN.01006901.xml

| 12.3.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 67/69 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.3.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 67/69

---

Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/2362 of 15 December 2015 concerning exemptions from the extended anti-dumping duty on certain bicycle parts originating in the People's Republic of China pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 88/97

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 331 of 17 December 2015
  )

On page 36, in Article 5, Table 4 ‘Parties under examination’, in column ‘Date of effect’, for company ‘CICLI EUROPA s.r.l’:

for:

‘
  10.9.2014
  ’,

read:

‘
  10.11.2014
  ’.

---
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Staff

# Environmental Impact Statement for the License Renewal of  the Columbia Fuel Fabrication Facility in Richland County,  South Carolina – Final Report (NUREG-2248)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG-2248 (PDF – 9.82 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** July 2022**Date Published: **July 2022Office of Nuclear Material Safety and SafeguardsU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionWashington, DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Abstract

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) prepared this environmental impact statement (EIS) as part of its environmental review of the Westinghouse Electric Company, LLC (WEC) license renewal application to renew its special nuclear material (SNM) license SNM–1107 to continue operating the Columbia Fuel Fabrication Facility (CFFF) for an additional 40 years. The CFFF is located in Hopkins, South Carolina, and has been operating since 1969. This EIS provides the NRC staff’s evaluation of the potential environmental impacts of the proposed action, the no-action alternative, and a 20-year license renewal alternative. The proposed action is the renewal of the special nuclear material license SNM-1107 to allow the WEC to continue licensed operations and activities at the CFFF site for an additional 40 years.

On June 5, 2020, the NRC staff decided to prepare an EIS because new information related to the WEC’s remedial investigations being conducted under a Consent Agreement with South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control revealed uncertainty related to the source and extent of contamination onsite and the potential future migration pathways offsite and precluded the NRC staff from making a finding of no significant impact through the environmental assessment process.

The WEC’s ongoing remedial investigations under the Consent Agreement with South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control are being conducted in coordination with the State, not the NRC. However, the NRC staff considered these remedial investigations and associated actions in its description of the affected environment and environmental impact determinations in this EIS.

Based on its environmental review, the NRC staff recommends that the WEC’s license SNM–1107 for the operation of the CFFF be renewed for an additional 40 years. The NRC staff based its recommendation on the following:
        - the license renewal application, which includes the environmental report and supplemental documents and the WEC’s responses to the NRC staff’s Requests for Additional Information
        - consultation with Federal, State, and Tribal agencies and input from other stakeholders, including comments on the draft EIS
        - independent NRC staff review of environmental issues
        - the assessments of impact determinations provided in this EIS

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Monday, August 01, 2022
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of NEON Communications Group, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal period ending March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Eric J. Sandman, Principal 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 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.

Date: May 9, 2007

/s/
          Eric J. SandmanEric J. SandmanPrincipal Financial
          Officer


---
# L_2014341EN.01000101.xml

| 27.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 341/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 341/1

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 1262/2014

of 18 November 2014

entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Pecorino Crotonese (PDO))

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

1

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Italy's application to register the name ‘Pecorino Crotonese’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union
   (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Italy's application to register the name ‘Pecorino Crotonese’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union
   (2).

Official Journal of the European Union

2

| (2) | As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Pecorino Crotonese’ should therefore be entered in the register, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Pecorino Crotonese’ should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name ‘Pecorino Crotonese’ (PDO) is hereby registered.

The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.3 Cheeses, as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).

3

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Official Journal of the European Union

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 18 November 2014.

For the Commission,

On behalf of the President,

Phil HOGAN

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

1

(2)  OJ C 205, 2.7.2014, p. 22.

2

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).

3

---
Golden Global Corp.: Exhibit 10.3 - Filed by newsfilecorp.com






ADDENDUM TO THE

ASSET PURCHASE AND SHARE EXCHANGE AGREEMENT 
(The
“Agreement”)
Dated the 12th day of December, 2009.

BETWEEN:

VELOCITY RESOURCES CANADA LTD. a Company incorporated pursuant
to the laws of the Province of Alberta, whose address is Suite 201, 17412 105
Ave. Edmonton, Alberta T5S 1G4 

(Hereinafter “VRCL”) OF THE FIRST PART

AND:

Golden Global Corp. a Corporation to be registered in the State
of Nevada whose immediate address is Suite 2806, 505-6th Street SW,
Calgary, Alberta, T2P 1X5.

(Hereinafter “GLOBAL”) OF THE SECOND PART

WHEREAS:

	 	A. 	
      Global has established a wholly owned Canadian subsidiary
      named “Golden Global Mining Corporation”, registered in the Province of
      Alberta;

	 	 	 
	 	B. 	
      Both VRCL and Golden agree to add to or amend the
      Agreement as follows:



NOW THEREFORE THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSES that for and in
consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, the
parties covenant and agreements contained herein, the parties covenant and agree
each with the other as follows:

	 	1) 	
      The Assets in Schedule “A” shall be transferred to Golden
      Global Mining Corporation.

	 	 	 
	 	2) 	
      The transaction value for the Equipment shall be $173,841
      CAD. The transaction value for the two mining properties shall be $1 CAD
      each for a total of $173,843 CAD.

	 	 	 
	 	3) 	
      In consideration, Global agrees to issue 18,000,000
      shares of Global to VRCL or its nominees.



Dated this 12th day of December, 2009

	/s/ John Hope	 	/s/
      Tony Wong
	VRCL 	 	GLOBAL
#### INNKEEPERS OF NEW CASTLE, INC., petitioner, v. Robert J. MALEY, et al.

No. 82-221.

Supreme Court of the United States.

*213Oct. 12, 1982.

Denied.
IB 

Union Calendar No. 53 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1694 

[Report No. 115–93] 

To require additional entities to be subject to the requirements of section 

552 of title 5, United States Code (commonly referred to as the Freedom 

of Information Act), and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 23, 2017 

Mr. CHAFFETZ (for himself, Mr. DESANTIS, Mr. RUSSELL, Mr. DUNCAN of 

Tennessee, Mr. MASSIE, Mr. FARENTHOLD, Mr. COMER, Mr. BLUM, and 

Mr. ISSA) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

APRIL 24, 2017 

Additional sponsors: Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. HUDSON, and Mr. YOHO

APRIL 24, 2017 

Reported with an amendment, committed to the Committee of the Whole 

House on the State of the Union, and ordered to be printed 

[Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed in italic] 

[For text of introduced bill, see copy of bill as introduced on March 23, 2017] 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1694 RH

A BILL 

To require additional entities to be subject to the requirements of section 552 of title 5, United States Code 

(commonly referred to as the Freedom of Information 

Act), and for other purposes. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1694 RH

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

3 SEC. 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Fannie and Freddie 

5 Open Records Act of 2017’’. 

6 SEC. 2. APPLICABILITY OF FOIA. 

7 (a) APPLICABILITY TO GOVERNMENT SPONSORED EN8 TITIES IN CONSERVATORSHIP.—Section 552 of title 5, 

9 United States Code (commonly referred to as the Freedom 

10 of Information Act), is amended by adding at the end the 

11 following new subsection: 

12 ‘‘(n) The Federal National Mortgage Association or the 

13 Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation shall comply 

14 with agency requirements under this section during any pe15 riod such enterprise is under conservatorship or receiver16 ship pursuant to section 1367 of the Federal Housing En17 terprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 (12 

18 U.S.C. 4617).’’. 

19 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE; APPLICABILITY.—The amend20 ment made by subsection (a) shall be effective on the date 

21 of the enactment of this Act and shall apply with respect 

22 to any request filed under section 552(a)(3) of title 5, 

23 United States Code, on or after such effective date, relating 

24 to any record created before, on, or after the date of the 

25 enactment of this Act. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
Union Calendar No. 53 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1694 

[Report No. 115–93] 

A BILL 

To require additional entities to be subject to the 

dom of Information Act), and for other purposes. States Code (commonly referred to as the Freerequirements of section 552 of title 5, United 

APRIL 24, 2017 

Reported with an amendment, committed to the Comand ordered to be printed mittee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
#### Charles Kitchen *vs.*Hainsworth Baldwin.

York County.

Decided July 3, 1922.

*John V. Tucker,*for plaintiff.

*George A. Goodwin,*for defendant.

This is a suit to recover damages for a collision on the public highway between a bicycle upon which the plaintiff was riding and an automobile driven by the defendant. The plaintiff obtained a verdict of $492.00. Defendant seeks to have that verdict set aside by a motion for a new trial on the customary grounds. No exceptions are present upon questions of law. The case was tried before a jury. In addition to the spoken word of witnesses, the jury was assisted further by the presence of a chart upon which was delineated the locus of the accident. The principal street and the intersecting streets were there delineated. That chart was not before this court. As usual in such cases each side claimed negligence upon the part of the other and due care upon the part of themselves. The jury saw the witnesses, noted their appearance, heard their verbal testimony, and were fully competent to pass upon issues of fact. We have examined the record carefully and fail to see any evidence of bias, prejudice, misunderstanding, or lack of judgment on the part of the jury. Plainly the questions involved were for the determination of a jury and the losing party has failed to satisfy us that his motion should prevail. Motion overruled.
No. 90-6284.

#### Conley *v.*Warden, Maryland Penitentiary.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.