alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>



                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.4

                           [Letterhead of Ryder Scott]

                      CONSENT OF RYDER SCOTT COMPANY, L.P.

As independent petroleum engineers, we hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference in this Registration Statement on Form S-8, filed by Plains
Exploration & Production Company, as well as in the notes to the combined
financial statements incorporated by reference in such Form S-8, information
contained in certain reserve reports effective December 31, 1999, December 31,
2000, and December 31, 2001, nine (9) reports in total, setting forth certain
interests of Plains Exploration & Production Company and its subsidiary, Plains
Illinois Inc., relating to the estimated quantities of such companies' proved
reserves of oil and gas and future net income therefrom discounted at ten
percent (10%) for the periods included therein.

                                         /s/ Ryder Scott Company, L.P.
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                         RYDER SCOTT COMPANY, L.P.

Houston, Texas
January 21, 2003


                                       12
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 65 (Tuesday, April 5, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19690-19691]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-07116]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Center for Scientific Review; 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. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material,

[[Page 19691]]

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: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis 
Panel; Therapeutic Development and Preclinical Studies.
    Date: April 14, 2022.
    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Rockledge II, 6701 
Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Richard D. Schneiderman, Ph.D., Scientific 
Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of 
Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4138, Bethesda, MD 20817, 301-
402-3995, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a1d3c8c2c9c0d3c58fd2c2c9cfc4c8c5c4d3ccc0cfe1cfc8c98fc6ced7"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="94e6fdf7fcf5e6f0bae7f7fcfaf1fdf0f1e6f9f5fad4fafdfcbaf3fbe2">[email protected]</span></a>.
    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, 
Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 
93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, 
National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: March 30, 2021.
David W. Freeman,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-07116 Filed 4-4-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


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

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8651 

To acknowledge the crime of lynching, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 23, 2020 

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

on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To acknowledge the crime of lynching, and for other 

purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PROHIBITING LYNCHING. 

4 Section 249(a) of title 18, United States Code, is 

5 amended— 

6 (1) by redesignating paragraph (4) as para7 graph (5); and 

8 (2) by inserting after paragraph (3) the fol9 lowing: 

10 ‘‘(4) OFFENSES INVOLVING LYNCHING.— 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8651 IH

1 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Whoever, acting with 

2 one or more individuals, engages in conduct de3 scribed in paragraph (1) or (2) that results in 

4 death, shall be subject to the same penalties as 

5 prescribed in those paragraphs. 

6 ‘‘(B) LIMITATION ON PROSECUTION.—A 

7 person who is prosecuted for unlawful conduct 

8 under this paragraph may not be prosecuted for 

9 the same conduct under paragraph (1) or (2).’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
#### COM. v. LUGO, N.

2074 MDA 2016

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

09/26/2017

CP-22-CR-0000418-2015 (Dauphin)

Affirmed
No. 11-10244.

#### Adkins *v.*Armstrong et al.

C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 43 (Wednesday, March 5, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 10057]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-5420]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-5699-4]


Agency Information Collection Activities Under OMB Review

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the Office of Management and Budget's 
(OMB) responses to Agency clearance requests, in compliance with the 
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et. seq.). An agency may not 
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a 
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB 
control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are 
listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sandy Farmer, (202) 260-2740; please refer to the appropriate EPA 
Information Collection Request (ICR) Number.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

OMB Responses to Agency Clearance Requests

OMB Approvals

    EPA ICR No. 1746.01; NESHAP for Elastomers--40 CFR 63, Subpart U; 
was approved 02/04/97; OMB No. 2060-0356; expires 02/28/2000.
    EPA ICR No. 0613.06; Trade Secret Clearance Justification; was 
approved 02/06/97; OMB No. 2070-0053; expires 02/28/2000.
    EPA ICR No. 1001.06; Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs); Exclusions, 
Exemptions, and Use Authorizations; was approved 02/19/97; OMB No. 
2070-0008; expires 02/28/2000.
    EPA ICR No. 1687.03; National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants for Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Operations; was 
approved 02/19/97; OMB No. 2060-0314; expires 09/30/98.
    EPA ICR No. 1587.04; Part 70 Operating Permits Regulations; was 
approved 02/20/97; OMB No. 2060-0243; expires 02/28/2000.
    EPA ICR No. 1415.03; NESHAP for Dry Cleaning Facilities/
Perchloroethylene (PCE)-(63, M) was approved 02/20/97; OMB No. 2060-
0234; expires 02/28/2000.
    EPA ICR No. 0262.08; RCRA Hazardous Waste Permit Application and 
Modification, Part A; was approved 09/30/96; OMB No. 2050-0034; expires 
10/31/99.
    EPA ICR No. 0574.10; Addendum to Existing ICR to Include the Final 
Rule for Certain Microbial Products of Biotechnology; was approved 02/
19/97; OMB No. 2070-0012; expires 02/28/2000.

Extension of Expiration Dates

    EPA ICR No. 1665.01; Confidentiality Rules; expiration date was 
extended from 02/28/97 to 04/30/97.
    EPA ICR No. 1759.01; Worker Protection Standard; expiration date 
was extended from 02/28/97 to 05/31/97.

    Dated: February 27, 1997.
Joseph Retzer,
Director, Regulatory Information Division
[FR Doc. 97-5420 Filed 3-4-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-M
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF

THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Keith C. Regnante, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 2 to Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Wave Life Sciences Ltd.
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such
statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|3. | Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: May 9, 2018



|                                                                                      
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Keith C. Regnante                                                                 
|Keith C. Regnante                                                                     
|Chief Financial Officer
(principal financial officer and
principal accounting officer)
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed February 22, 2023.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D23-0096

Lower Tribunal No. F97-34245C

________________

Carlton Bannister,

Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida,

Appellee.

An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from 

the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Lody Jean, Judge.

Carlton Bannister, in proper person.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before LOGUE, GORDO and LOBREE, JJ. 

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Bannister v. State, 990 So. 2d 595 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008).
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 87 

To amend chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, to provide for en bloc 

consideration in resolutions of disapproval for ‘‘midnight rules’’, and 

for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 3, 2019 

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

on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period 

to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee 

concerned 

A BILL 

To amend chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, to provide 

for en bloc consideration in resolutions of disapproval 

for ‘‘midnight rules’’, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Midnight Rules Relief 

5 Act of 2019’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 87 IH

1 SEC. 2. EN BLOC CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTIONS OF 

2 DISAPPROVAL PERTAINING TO ‘‘MIDNIGHT 

3 RULES’’. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 801(d) of title 5, United 

5 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol6 lowing: 

7 ‘‘(4) In applying section 802 to rules described under 

8 paragraph (1), a joint resolution of disapproval may con9 tain one or more such rules if the report under subsection 

10 (a)(1)(A) for each such rule was submitted during the 

11 final year of a President’s term.’’. 

12 (b) TEXT OF RESOLVING CLAUSE.—Section 802(a) 

13 of title 5, United States Code, is amended— 

14 (1) by inserting after ‘‘resolving clause of which 

15 is’’ the following: ‘‘(except as otherwise provided in 

16 this subsection)’’; and 

17 (2) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘In the 

18 case of a joint resolution under section 801(d)(4), 

19 the matter after the resolving clause of such resolu20 tion shall be as follows: ‘That Congress disapproves 

21 the following rules: the rule submitted by the ll 

22 relating to ll; and the rule submitted by the ll 

23 relating to ll. Such rules shall have no force or 

24 effect.’ (The blank spaces being appropriately filled 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•HR 87 IH

1 in and additional clauses describing additional rules 

2 to be included as necessary)’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2022 EAVS Data Brief: Wisconsin EAVS Jurisdictions:

1,851 

 Voter Registration 

Active Reg. Voters as of Nov. 8, 20221 

3,670,188 

Reg. Forms Received2* 

393,064 

Total Confirmation Notices Sent3* 

622,370 

Voters Removed from Reg. Rolls4* 

643,975 

Source of Registration Applications5 

Online 45.6% 

Other 31.4% 

In Person 17.0% 

Mail, Email, Fax 6.0% 

Motor Vehicle Dept. 0.0% 

 Voting and Turnout 

Voters Participating By Mode6 

7 Turnout 

59.7% 

In-Person 

Election Day

1,909,173 

71.4% 

Mail 

425,970 

15.9% 

In-Person 

Early 

332,001 

12.4% 

Other 

6,010 

0.2% 

Total Voting Locations8: 2,541 

Total Poll Workers9: --

Election Technology 

Percentage of Jurisdictions Using...10 

91.8% 

Ballot 

Marking 

Devices 

90.1% 

Scanners 

9.7% 

Hand 

Counting 

8.8% 

DREs with

VVPAT 

7.1% 

Electronic 

Poll 

Books 

0.0% 

DREs w/o 

VVPAT 

 Mail Ballots 

• 478,260 mail ballots transmitted11 

• 90.2% of transmitted mail ballots returned by voters12 

• 99.1% of returned mail ballots counted13 

• 0.9% of returned mail ballots rejected14 

• Did not conduct all-mail election15 

• Allowed drop boxes16 

• Allowed ballot curing17 

 Election Audits18 

✔ Access audit 

-- Ballot design audit 

Ballot reconciliation ✔ audit 

Compliance/ -- procedural audit 

✔ Eligibility audit 

-- Legal audit 

Logic and accuracy ✔ testing 

Post-election ✔ tabulation audit 

-- Other 

Notes 

EAVS data and reports may be downloaded at www.eac.gov 

/research-and-data/datasets-codebooks-and-surveys. 

Responses of “Does not apply,” “Data not available,” and “Valid 

skip” are shown as zeroes or dashes. Percentages may not sum 

to 100% because of missing data or rounding. 

* Close of registration for 2020 

general election to close of 

registration for 2022 general 

election. 

1 A1b of EAVS. 

2 A3a of EAVS. 

3 A8a of EAVS. 

4 A9a of EAVS. 

5 Mail, Email, Fax is A4a/A3a. 

In Person is A4b/A3a. Online is 

A4c/A3a. Motor Vehicle Dept. is 

A4d/A3a. Other is the sum of 

A4e–A4l/A3a. May not sum to 

100% because of missing data. 

6 In-Person Election Day is F1b. 

Mail is F1d+F1g. In-Person Early 

is F1f. Other is F1c+F1e+F1h. 

7 F1a of EAVS divided by citizen 

voting age population (CVAP). 

8 D2a of EAVS. 

9 D7a of EAVS. 

10 F3a–f, F5a–F9a of EAVS; 

number of jurisdictions that 

responded “Yes” divided by

number of jurisdictions in 

state/territory. 

11 C1a of EAVS. 

12 C1b/C1a of EAVS. 

13 C8a/C1b of EAVS. 

14 C9a/C1b of EAVS. 

15 Q17 and Q17a of Policy 

Survey. 

16 Q19 of Policy Survey. 

17 Q20 of Policy Survey. 

18 Q36 of Policy Survey. See 

survey questionnaire for full 

definitions of each type of 

audit.
EXHIBIT 32


                            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  Quarterly Report of Air Methods Corporation (the
"Company")  on  Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I certify,
pursuant  to  18  U.S.C.  Sec.  1350,  as  adopted  pursuant  to Sec. 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/ Aaron D. Todd
--------------------------------
Aaron D. Todd
Chief Executive Officer
May 17, 2004


/s/ Trent J. Carman
--------------------------------
Trent J. Carman
Chief Financial Officer
May 17, 2004


A  signed  original  of  this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided  to  Air  Methods  Corporation  and will be retained by Air Methods and
furnished  to  the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


<PAGE>
#### Olga Adriana SARMIENTO, Plaintiff-Appellant v. CITY OF LAREDO, TEXAS; Juan M. Villarreal; Joe E. Baeza Defendants-Appellees

No. 17-40767 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed February 23, 2018

Gay Ellen Gilson, Counsel, Law Office of Gay E. Gilson, Corpus Christi, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellant

Albert Lopez, Esq., Law Office of Albert Lopez, San Antonio, TX, for Defendants-Appellees

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Appellant presents two issues for review in her appeal of the final sumary judgment entered in favor of Officers Villareal and Baeza and the City of Laredo: (1) whether the district court abused its discretion in relying on an erroneous legal premise that a police officer who reasonably believes he has probable cause to seek an arrest warrant is not liable for false arrest when he fails to disclose exculpatory evidence; and (2) whether the City established by undisputed facts it took sufficient steps to protect its citizens from unconstitutional arrests under the Fourth Amendment by putting in place protections to ensure exculpatory evidence is divulged by investigating officers seeking an arrest warrant. Because Appellant requests this court to reverse the grant of summary judgment in favor of the City only, and does not seek reversal of summary judgment in favor of the individual Officers, the first issue is waived. Consequently, this court only considers whether the district court committed error in granting summary judgment for the City. As to this issue, the court has carefully considered the appeal in light of the briefs and pertinent portions of the record. Having done so, we find no error of law or material issue of fact. The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED for es*349sentially the same reasons articulated by that court.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir, R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R, 47.5.4.
(logo) CWCapital

ASSET MANAGEMENT

 

Annual Statement as to Compliance

For the Period of January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015

 

MSBAM 2015-C20 

 

 

In accordance with Item 1123 of Regulation AB and with the requirements detailed in §13.9 of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement (the “Agreement”) for the above-mentioned CMBS pool, (the “CMBS Pool”), CWCapital Asset Management LLC (“CWCAM”), in its capacity as Special Servicer, is providing this Officer’s Certificate with respect to the following:

 

(A) a review of CWCAM’s activities during the preceding calendar year or portion thereof (the "Reporting Period") and of CWCAM’s performance under the Agreement has been made under such officer’s supervision and; 

 

(B) to the best of such officer’s knowledge, based on such review, CWCAM has fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

 

Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. 

 

 

Sincerely,

CWCapital Asset Management LLC

/s/ David B. Iannarone

David B. Iannarone

President

 

7501 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 500 West, Bethesda, MD 20814

www.cwcapital.com
#### Lew Kay v. State.

153 So. 311.

Division B.

Opinion Filed February 21, 1934.

Petition for Rehearing Denied March 21, 1934.

*Pat Whitaker*and *Hampton, Bull & Crom,*for Plaintiff in Error;

*Cary D. Landis,*Attorney General, and *Roy Campbell,*Assistant, for the State.

*47Buford, J.

— The writ of error here is to a judgment of the Circuit Court in and for Pinellas County wherein the plaintiff in error was adjudged guilty of manslaughter.

We deem it unnecessary to discuss more than two of the questions presented by the plaintiff in error for our determination.

There was a motion for change of venue, which motion was denied. When the record in this case is measured by the rule enunciated by this Court in the case of Jeffcoat v. State, 103 Fla. 466, 138 Sou. 385, we find no reversible error in the order of the Court denying the motion.

Motion was made to quash the indictment because of duplicity. The indictment contained every allegation necessary to charge the offense of manslaughter under the provisions of Section 5039, R. G. S», 7141 C. G. L., and it also contained all the allegations necessary to charge the same offense under the provisions of Chapter 9269, Acts of 1923, and all allegations were combined in one count.

Section 5039, R. G. S., 7141 C. G. L., declares that certain acts shall constitute the offense of manslaughter; while Chapter 9269, Acts of 1923, declares that certain other acts shall also constitute the offense of manslaughter and shall be punished as is provided by law for the offense of manslaughter.

The fact that all allegations essential to charge the offense under either statute are contained in one count of an in*48dictment does not under the adjudicated cases in this jurisdiction make the indictment invalid or subject to motion to quash because of duplicity.

In the case of Irvin v. State, 52 Fla. 51, 41 Sou. 785, this Court quoted with approval the former enunciation of this Court in the case of Bredley v. State, 20 Fla. 738, saying:

> “When a statute makes either of two or more distinct acts, connected with the same.general offense, and subject to the same punishment, indictable as distinct crimes, they may, when committed by the same person, at the same time, be Coupled in one count and constitute but one offense; and such an indictment will not be subject to the charge of being duplicitous.”

We have examined the other assignments of error and find no reversible error disclosed by the record.

The judgment should be affirmed, and it is so ordered.

Affirmed.

Davis, C. J., and Whitfield and Terrell, J. J., concur.
Exhibit 35.1





SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT





HARLEY-DAVIDSON CREDIT CORP.





I, James Darrell Thomas, Vice President, Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer and Assistant Secretary of Harley-Davidson Credit Corp. (“HDCC”), certify that:





(i) a review of HDCC’s activities for the period from January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018 (the “Reporting Period”) and of HDCC’s performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of January 1, 2015 (the “Sale and Servicing Agreement”) among Harley-Davidson Motorcycle Trust 2015-1, Harley-Davidson Customer Funding Corp., HDCC, and The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A., has been made under my supervision; and





(ii) to the best of my knowledge, based on such review, HDCC has fulfilled in all material respects all of its obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement throughout the Reporting Period.





IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 25th day of March, 2019.











/s/ James Darrell ThomasJames Darrell ThomasVice President, Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer and Assistant Secretary of Harley-Davidson Credit Corp., Servicer to Harley-Davidson Motorcycle Trust 2015-1