alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 34 (Friday, February 18, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 9362]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03554]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended, and the Determination of the Director, Strategic 
Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, CDC, 
pursuant to Public Law 92-463. The grant applications and the 
discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial 
property such as patentable material, and personal information 
concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the 
disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of 
personal privacy.
    Name of Committee: Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and 
Control Special Emphasis Panel (SEP)--SIP22-004, Disability and Health 
Data Collaborative: Using Data to Promote the Health and Wellness of 
People with Disabilities.
    Date: May 3, 2022.
    Time: 11:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m., EDT.
    Place: Teleconference.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    For Further Information Contact: Jaya Raman, Ph.D., Scientific 
Review Officer, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and 
Health Promotion, CDC, 4770 Buford Highway, Mailstop S107-B, Atlanta, 
Georgia 30341, Telephone: (770) 488-6511, Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#aae0f8cbc7cbc4eac9cec984cdc5dc"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="4a00182b272b240a292e29642d253c">[email protected]</span></a>.
    The Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the 
Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 
has been delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices 
pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management 
activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and 
the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

Kalwant Smagh,
Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief 
Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2022-03554 Filed 2-17-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
FOURTH AMENDMENT TO

AGREEMENT FOR PURCHASE AND SALE OF REAL PROPERTY


 


THIS FOURTH AMENDMENT
TO AGREEMENT FOR PURCHASE AND SALE OF REAL PROPERTY (this "Amendment"), is made May 30, 2012, by and among,
AR CAPITAL, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, formerly known as American Realty Capital II, LLC, ("Buyer")
and THE PARTIES IDENTIFIED ON SCHEDULE "A" of the Agreement as hereinafter defined (individually a "Seller"
collectively, the "Sellers").


 


WHEREAS, Buyer and
Sellers entered into that certain Agreement for Purchase and Sale of Real Property, with an Effective Date of February 8, 2012,
as amended by that certain First Amendment to Agreement for Purchase and Sale of Real Property dated as of February 28, 2012 as
further amended by that certain Second Amendment to Agreement for Purchase and Sale of Real Property dated as of March 12, 2012
and as further amended by that certain Third Amendment to Agreement for Purchase and Sale of Real Property dated as of May 11,
2012 (collectively the "Agreement") , with regard to the Property, more particularly described in the Agreement.
Buyer and Seller wish to amend the Agreement as provided herein.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in
consideration of the mutual promise contained herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of
which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby agree that the Agreement shall be amended as follows:


 


		1.	Closing. Notwithstanding anything in the Agreement to the contrary nor any other agreements
or understandings to the contrary between Buyer and Seller, the Closing shall occur on May 31, 2012.



 

		2.	Miscellaneous. Except as expressly modified hereby, the terms of the Agreement as previously
amended, shall remain in full force and effect as written. Any capitalized term used in this Agreement and not otherwise defined
herein, shall have the meaning ascribed to such term in the Agreement. This Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts,
each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which, when taken together shall constitute on agreement.



 


Signatures appear on following pages.






    	 



    	 	



    
 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties
hereto have executed this Amendment as of the day and year first set forth above.










 


 


	 	SELLER:
	 	 
	 	THE PARTIES IDENTIFIED ON SCHEDULE "A"
	 	 
	 	By: DAVENPORT EXCHANGE, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company
	 	 
	 	
        By: INLAND PRIVATE CAPITAL CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation,
        its sole member, as Attorney in Fact under written power or attorney which signs on their behalf

         

	 	 
	 	By: 	/s/ Rahul Sehgal
	 	 	Name: Rahul Sehgal
	 	 	Title: Senior Vice President


 


 


 


	 	BUYER
	 	 
	 	
        AR CAPITAL, LLC,

        a Delaware limited liability company

	 	 
	 	By: 	/s/ Edward M. Weil, Jr.
	 	 	Name: Edward M. Weil, Jr.
	 	 	Title: President
f10k2011a1ex10xxxv_yida.htm



Exhibit 10.35




 


[English Summary]







Mountain and Forest Land Lease Contract







Lessor/Party A: Bengbu City Lilou Town Caoxiang Village Committee


Lessee/Party B: Anhui Xingguang Investment Group Ltd.







Lease:


Party A agreed to lease the mountains land of approximately 1500 mu to Party B.







Term:


70 years from November 10, 2009 to November 10, 2079.







Rent and Payment:


60,000 RMB each year and payable annually. Such rent shall increase 10% for every ten years.







Restrictions:


Party B may conduct operations within the policies of the government. Party A shall assist Party B to obtain approval from relevant governmental agencies if Party B needs to construct houses (including roads) and other facilities.







Termination:


(1) Party A may terminate this Agreement if Party B cannot make payment of the rent on time and if Party B still not able to make payment within one month of written notice from Party A.


(2) This Agreement shall be terminated automatically and unconditionally in case of the expropriation of government planning and public construction needs of the mountain forest land. Party B shall be entitled to compensation of all its assets and possible benefits from expropriation party. Compensation of the mountain and forest land shall belong to Party A.


(3) Party A cannot reclaim the rental of land stipulated in this Agreement. If Party A terminates the Agreement other than described in this Agreement, Party A shall compensate to Party B all its economic losses resulting from termination of the Agreement.







Renewal:


Party A and B may negotiate renewal of the Agreement within 6 months of the expiration of the Agreement. If there is new lessee, Party B is entitled to the appreciation value of its invested assets, real estates and ground attachments on the mountain and forest lands, from the new lessee.







Breach of Contract:


Defaulting party shall pay liquidated damages of 10,000 RMB to the other party and compensate any economic losses to the other party. Observant party may terminate the Agreement unilaterally.


 




  





1











  











Dispute:


If there is any dispute between the parties, both parties shall resolve the dispute through compromise settlement. If the parties cannot reach the settlement, then either party can resolve the dispute by the court of competent jurisdiction.







Date of the Agreement:


November 10, 2009







2
#### Ophelia J. Cuthbert v. Antoinette L. Schermerhorn *et al.*

Order affirmed, with costs and disbursements.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6479 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 6479

To limit the availability of a plea deal for any person responsible for 
              the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 24, 2023

  Mr. Steube introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To limit the availability of a plea deal for any person responsible for 
              the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON PLEA DEAL.

    The President shall direct the Attorney General to refuse any plea 
for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed or any co-conspirators responsible for the 
terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, to the extent that any such 
plea precludes a public trial or a sentence that includes capital 
punishment.
                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6904

ORLANDO DAVID ALMOND,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

ALTON BASKERVILLE,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Richmond. David G. Lowe, Magistrate Judge.

(CA-01-230-3)

Submitted: September 4, 2002 Decided: October 8, 2002

Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Orlando David Almond, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Thomas Judge,

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
* The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate

judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2000).

2

PER CURIAM:

Orlando David Almond seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s

order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254

(2000). We have reviewed the record and the magistrate judge’s

opinion and conclude on the reasoning of the magistrate judge that

Almond has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a

constitutional right.*

 See Almond v. Baskerville, No. CA-01-230-3

(E.D. Va. May 17, 2002). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)

(2000). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jahques ROGERS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-16132 Non-Argument Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

(May 24, 2017)

*822■ R. Brian Tanner, James D. Durham, Jennifer Kirkland, Marcela C. Mateo, Brian T. Rafferty, Edward J. Tarver, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Savannah, GA, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Jahques Rogers, Savannah, GA, for Defendant-Appellant

Before HULL, WILSON, and ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

W. Thomas Hudson, appointed counsel for Jahques Rogers in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Rogers filed a response, in which he states that Hudson has provided ineffective assistance of counsel.

Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. We do not consider Rogers’s allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel because the record is not sufficiently developed for review. *See United States v. Puentes-Hurtado,*794 F.3d 1278, 1285 (11th Cir. 2015). He is free to raise these, allegations on collateral review in a motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. § *2255.See id.*

Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Rogers’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.
#### CERTUSVIEW TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant v. S & N LOCATING SERVICES, LLC, S & N Communications, Inc., Defendants-Appellees

2016-2605

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

August 11, 2017

Thomas Joseph Friel, Jr., Cooley LLP, San Francisco, CA, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Also represented by Christopher C. Campbell, Reston, VA; Angela Campbell Tarasí, Janna Fischer, James P. Brogan, Orion Armón, Broomfield, CO.

Daniel O’connor, Baker & McKenzie LLP, Chicago, IL, argued for defendants-appellees. Also represented by Michael A. Duffy; Erin M. Choi, Dallas, TX.

(Wallach, Chen, and Hughes, Circuit Judges).

JUDGMENT

Per Curiam

This Cause having been heard and considered, it is Ordered and Adjudged:

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 43 (Friday, March 4, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 12474]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-04581]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4480-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2022-0001]


New York; Amendment No. 9 to Notice of a Major Disaster 
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of New York (FEMA-4480-DR), dated March 20, 2020, and 
related determinations.

DATES: This change occurred on February 16, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and 
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency 
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the 
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, David 
Warrington, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating 
Officer for this disaster.
    This action terminates the appointment of Chad M. Gorman as Federal 
Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, 
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis 
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster 
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance 
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and 
Households in Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, 
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing 
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially 
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other 
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially 
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2022-04581 Filed 3-3-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Janio VICO, Jharildan Vico, Defendants-Appellants.

No. 16-10400

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

(June 23, 2017)

*595Robert Craig Juman, Jason Wu, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Wifredo A. Ferrer, Vivian Rosado, Emily M. Smachetti, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Miami, FL, Ellen L. Cohen, U.S. Attorney’s Office, West Palm Beach, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Humberto Dominguez, Humberto R. Dominguez, PA, Miami, FL, for Defendant-Appellant Janio Vico

John E. Bergendahl, Law Offices of John E. Bergendahl, Miami, FL, for Defendant-Appellant Jharildan Vico

Before TJOFLAT and WILSON, Circuit Judges, and ROBRENO,* District Judge.

*

 Honorable Eduardo C. Robreno, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, sitting by designation.

PER CURIAM:

Following a jury trial, Janio and Jharil-dan Vico were convicted of conspiracy to commit mail fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349, mail fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341, conspiracy to commit money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h), and money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1957, and sentenced to 108 months in prison. They appeal their convictions and sentences. We have considered all of the Vicos’ specifications of error. We have reviewed the following:

> 1. Whether the district court abused its discretion by allowing testimony regarding Cuban ethnicity, in violation of the Vicos’ due process and equal protection rights?

> 2. Whether the district court plainly erred in allowing evidence of prior bad acts and improper character evidence?

> 3. Whether the district court plainly erred in allowing testimony from Captain Steven Smith of Florida’s Division of Insurance Fraud?

> 4. Whether the district court erred in its calculations regarding the loss amount and number of victims?

> 5. Whether the district court erred in its forfeiture determinations?

> 6. Whether the impact of cumulative error denied the Vicos their right to a fair trial?

After careful review of the briefs and the record, and having the benefit of oral argument, we find no reversible error. The decision of the district court is

AFFIRMED.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 681 

To reauthorize the READ Act. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 31, 2023 

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey (for himself and Ms. MENG) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

A BILL 

To reauthorize the READ Act. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘READ Act Reauthor5 ization Act of 2023’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION. 

7 Section 4(a) of the Reinforcing Education Account8 ability in Development Act (division A of Public Law 115– 

9 56; 22 U.S.C. 2151c note) is amended by striking ‘‘during 

10 the following five fiscal years’’ and inserting ‘‘during the 

11 following ten fiscal years’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
##### 



Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
RULE 13a-14(a) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 In connection with the quarterly report of Connetics Corporation (the Registrant) on Form
10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the Report), I, John L. Higgins, Chief Financial Officer; Executive Vice
President, Finance and Corporate Development of the Registrant, certify, in accordance with Rule
13a-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my
knowledge: (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
applicable, 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 Registrant. This certification accompanies theForm 10-Qto which it relates, is not deemed filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing
of the Registrant under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether
made before or after the date of theForm 10-Q), irrespective of any general incorporation language
contained in such filing. Date: May 10, 2005
    /s/ John L. HigginsJohn L. HigginsChief Financial Officer; Executive Vice President,
Finance and Corporate Development
Order entered July 9, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-00051-CV

WINSTON ACQUISITION CORP, Appellant

V.

BLUE VALLEY APARTMENTS, INC, Appellee

On Appeal from the 116th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-11-01373

ORDER

The Court has before it appellant’s July 5, 2013 notice of incomplete record or, in the 

alternative, motion to extend time to file appellant’s brief. The Court GRANTS the motion and 

ORDERS appellant to make arrangements to have the remainder of the reporter’s record filed 

within thirty days of the date of this order. Appellant is further ORDERED to file its brief 

within thirty days after the complete reporter’s record is filed.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS 

JUSTICE
#### Craig v. Hasselman *et al.*

Intoxicating Liquors: nuisance : pleading : denting residence of plaintiff. In. an action to abate a liquor saloon as a nuisance, where plaintiff shows his right to maintain the action by alleging that he is a citizen of the county, such allegation is not put in issue by a general denial, nor by (what amounts to the same thing) a denial of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averment. (Compare *Littleton v. Harris,*13 Iowa, 161.)

*Appeal from Des Moines District Court.*— Hon. Charles II. Phelps, Judge.

Filed, May 25, 1888.

Action in equity to abate a nuisance alleged to be maintained in the keeping of a saloon or dramshop. There was a decree in the district court for the defendants. Plaintiff appeals.

*Newman & Blalce,*for appellant.

*P. Henry Smyth & Son,*for appellees.

Rothrook, J.

I. The plaintiff, as showing his capacity to maintain the action, averred that he was, and for many years had been, a citizen and resident of Des Moines county, Iowa. The defendant answered this averment of the petition as follows: “As to whether plaintiff is, or for many years has been, a citizen of Des Moines county, defendant has no knowledge or information sufficient to' form a belief, and therefore leaves plaintiff to his proof.” This form of answer is authorized by section 2655, of the Code. It presents precisely the same issue as a general denial of the averments of the petition. The plaintiff, if a resident and citizen of the county, is authorized by law to maintain *539the action ; and a general denial of residence and citizenship raises no issue. This defense should be specially pleaded, as that the defendant was neither a native-born nor a naturalized citizen, or that he was a resident of some other named county or place. See *Littleton v.*Harris, 73 Iowa, 161 ; Code, sec. 2717. There was therefore no necessity for the plaintiff to make proof of his citizenship or residence.

II. The cause appears to have been tried upon its merits, and is here for trial anew. It is claimed that the evidence shows that the defendants maintained and kept the saloon as alleged in the petition. An examination of the record and evidence leads us to the conclusion that the position of plaintiff’s counsel must be sustained. We think the court below must have been of opinion that the plaintiff was not entitled to a decree, because it was not shown by sufficient evidence that he was a citizen of the county.

The fact of the keeping of the saloon appears to us to be established by a clear preponderance of the evidence. There are other questions discussed by counsel which we do not deem it necessary to consider. The decree of the district court will be reversed. The plaintiff asks that a final decree be entered in this court in accord with the prayer of the petition. It is so ordered.

Reversed.