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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5061 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5061

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey Paint Bank National 
  Fish Hatchery and Wytheville National Fish Hatchery to the State of 
                               Virginia.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Paint Bank and Wytheville National 
Fish Hatcheries Conveyance Act''.

SEC. 2. CONVEYANCE OF PAINT BANK AND WYTHEVILLE NATIONAL FISH 
              HATCHERIES TO THE STATE OF VIRGINIA.

    (a) In General.--Within 180 days after the date of the enactment of 
this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall convey to the State of 
Virginia without reimbursement all right, title, and interest of the 
United States in and to the property described in subsection (b) for 
use by the Virginia Department of Fish and Game as part of the State of 
Virginia fish culture program.
    (b) Property Described.--The property referred to in subsection (a) 
consists of--
            (1) the real property comprising Paint Bank National Fish 
        Hatchery and Wytheville National Fish Hatchery, located at 
        Paint Bank and Wytheville, Virginia, respectively, as described 
        in the 1982 Cooperative Agreement between the United States 
        Fish and Wildlife Service and the State of Virginia;
            (2) all improvements and related personal property under 
        the control of the Secretary that is located on that real 
        property, including buildings, structures, and equipment; and
            (3) all easements, leases, and water rights relating to the 
        property described in paragraphs (1) and (2).
    (c) Reversionary Interest.--If any of the property conveyed to the 
State of Virginia under this section is used for any purpose other than 
the use authorized under subsection (a), all right, title, and interest 
in and to all property conveyed under this section shall revert to the 
United States. The State of Virginia shall ensure that all property 
reverting to the United States under this subsection is in 
substantially the same or better condition as at the time of transfer 
to the State.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 10, 2006.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
109th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 5061

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey Paint Bank National 
  Fish Hatchery and Wytheville National Fish Hatchery to the State of 
                               Virginia.
```
Agreement



 Exhibit 10.3 

December 6, 2010 
 Steve Filton 
 Senior Vice President & CFO 

UHS of Delaware, Inc. 
 367 South Gulph Road

 King of Prussia, PA 19406 
 Dear
Steve; 
 The Board of Trustees of Universal Health Realty Income Trust (“UHT”), at their December 2, 2010
meeting, authorized the renewal of the current Advisory Agreement between UHT and UHS of Delaware, Inc. (“Agreement”) upon the same terms and conditions. 
 This letter constitutes UHT’s offer to renew the Agreement, through December 31, 2011, upon such terms and conditions. Please acknowledge UHS of Delaware’s acceptance of this offer by
signing in the space provided below and returning one copy of this letter to me. Thank you. 
 Sincerely, 

/s/ Cheryl K. Ramagano 
 Cheryl K.
Ramagano 
 Vice President, Treasurer and Secretary 
 Agreed and Accepted: 
 UHS OF DELAWARE, INC. 

By: /s/ Steve Filton 
 Steve Filton 
 Senior Vice President and CFO
#### Moses Richards and Ella Richards, *Appellants,*v. Max Kreher and Paul Kreher, *Appellees.*

Division B.

Decision Filed, April 26, 1928.

Petition for Rehearing Denied May 30, 1928.

*Harry G. Sabine,*for Appellants;

*Mabry, Heaves & Carlton,*for Appellees.

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the order herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court *821that there is no error in the said order; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and decreed by the Court that the said order of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 20-0385

_________________

JAMIE MICHAEL JOHNSON,

 Petitioner and Appellant,

 v.

STATE OF MONTANA,

 Respondent and Appellee.

O R D E R

_________________

The record was filed for purposes of this appeal on August 21, 2020. Nothing 

further has been filed, and the opening brief is now overdue.

THEREFORE,

IT IS ORDERED that Appellant shall prepare, file and serve the opening brief on 

appeal no later than November 9, 2020. Failure to file the brief within that time will result 

in dismissal of this appeal with prejudice and without further notice. 

The Clerk is directed to provide copies of this Order to all counsel of record. 

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

October 7 2020

10/07/2020

Case Number: DA 20-0385
From: Zekovich, Alex
To: Kordzi, Joe Subject: RE: Tolk cooling system converison study
Date: Thursday, September 17, 2015 9:43:33 AM

Hi Joe:

Was wondering if you found the indirect dry cooling information useful, or if you have any questions.

One thing I was going to note. The indirect dry cooling system would be somewhat of a fungible asset (at least related to Tolk). Whenever the coal plant will be retired in the future, Xcel will likely repower the 1GW coal plant with a CCPP. The indirect dry system in the study could then serve as a 100% dry heatsink for a 2GW CCPP repowering.

From: Kordzi, Joe [mailto:Kordzi.Joe@epa.gov]
Sent: Friday, August 28, 2015 7:34 AM
To: Gregasz, Attila <attila.gregasz@gea.com>
Cc: Zekovich, Alex <Alex.Zekovich@gea.com>; Cusick, Sean <Sean.Cusick@gea.com> Subject: RE: Tolk cooling system converison study

Thanks. As we discussed, I’ll include the redacted version in our docket and I’ll treat the nonredacted according to our CBI requirements. Also, I’ll delete the non-redacted version from our email system.

From: Gregasz, Attila [ mailto:attila.gregasz@gea.com ]
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 12:42 PM
To: Kordzi, Joe
Cc: Zekovich, Alex; Cusick, Sean Subject: Tolk cooling system converison study

Hello Joe,

Referring to the telephone conversation with Sean and Alex today, I hereby would like to send you the redacted and unredacted version of the above mentioned cooling system conversion study for your reference.

Please bear in mind that the price numbers were based on 2012 price level and contains assumptions to a certain extent.

Best regards,

Attila Gregasz Business Development Manager

GEA EGI Contracting/Engineering Co. Ltd.Phone +36 1 225 6199, Fax +36 1 225 6193 Mobile +36 30 632 1339 attila.gregasz@gea.com www.brand-change.com

emailsignatur

4-20 Irinyi J. Str, Science Park, Bldg."B", Budapest, H-1117, Hungary; Postal Address: P.O. Box 192, Budapest, H-1507, Hungary Registered Office: Budapest; Court of Registration: Budapest Metropolitan Court, Cg. 01-10-041888 Executive Board: András Balogh (President & CEO), László Ludvig, Tamás Lelkes, János Hangyál

Confidentiality note This e-mail, including any attachment, may contain confidential and privileged information. If you have received it by mistake, please notify us by reply e-mail and then delete this e-mail and any attachment from your system. Thank you!
#### Albert Gomez, Respondent, v Metro Terminals Corp. et al., Appellants. (And a Third-Party Action.)

[719 NYS2d 283]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (G. Aronin, J.), dated June 21, 1999, as denied their motion to dismiss the complaint or preclude the introduction of evidence on the ground that the plaintiff had lost certain magnetic resonance imaging films.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the appellants’ motion. The appellants did not show that the plaintiff’s loss of certain magnetic resonance imaging (hereinafter MRI) films was willful, contumacious, or in bad faith *(see,*CPLR 3126; *cf., Birch Hill Farm v Reed,*272 AD2d 282). Moreover, the appellants’ spoliation claims were unsupported by any proof establishing that the missing MRI films were of any significance *(cf., DiDomenico v C&S Aeromatik Supplies,*252 AD2d 41). Krausman, J. P., S. Miller, Friedmann and Luciano, JJ., concur.
Lisa RHODES, Plaintiff, v. Justin ROBERTSON, Defendant.

No. COA18-1253

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: July 16, 2019

AFFIRMED.
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10
- 08
- 00398
- CR
ERIK DONNELLY , Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

From the 249th District Court Johnson County, Texas Trial Court No. F41816

MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pursuant to a plea bargain, Erik Donn elly pleaded guilty to two counts of aggravated sexual assault of a child younger than fourteen years old and was placed on deferred adjudication community supervision for ten years. Approximately three months later, the State filed a motion to proceed wi th an adjudication of guilt. Donnelly pleaded true to the allegations, and the trial court adjudicated his guilt and sentenced him to life imprisonment. In his sole issue, Donnelly contends that the trial court abused its discretion in sentencing him to a term of life imprisonment.Donnelly v. State Page 2

To preserve a complaint for appellate review, a party must present a timely request, objection, or motion stating the specific grounds for the ruling desired. T EX
. R.
A PP
. P. 33.1(a). Here, Donnelly did not object to his sen tence at the time it was imposed, nor did he file a motion for new trial. Therefore, Donnelly did not preserve his complaint for review. See Trevino v. State , 174 S.W.3d 925, 927

- 28 (Tex. App.

— Co rpus Christi 2005, pet. ref’d). Nevertheless, a ggravated s exual assault of a child younger tha n fourteen years
old is a first

- degree felony. T EX
. P EN
. C ODE A NN
. § 22.021(e) (Vernon Supp

. 2010 ). The punishment for an indivi dual adjudged guilty of a first

- degree felony is imprisonment “for life or for any term of not more than 99 years or less than 5 years.” Id. § 12.32(a) (Vernon Supp. 2010 ). Donnelly’s sentence of life imprisonment is within the statutory range for the offense, and p unishment that is assessed within the statutory range for the
offense is gener ally not subject to challenge for excessive ness . Kim v. State , 283 S.W.3d 473, 475 (Tex. App.

— Fort Worth 2009, pet. ref’d); see Jordan v. State , 495 S.W.2d 949, 952 (Tex. Crim. App. 1973). Thus, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by imposing it s
sentence

. Donnelly also complains within his sole issue that the trial court erroneously allowed the State to present evidence of various extraneous offenses, but Donnelly did not preserve this complaint for appeal. The record reflects that Donnelly di d not object
to the evidence as being inadmissible extraneous offenses when it was admitted

. See
T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 33.1(a).Donnelly v. State Page 3

Based on the foregoing, we overrule Donnelly’s sole issue and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

REX D. DAVIS Justice
Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Reyna , and Justice Davis Affirmed Opinion delivered and filed October 27, 2010 Do not p ublish [C RPM]
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7544

TIDES JERRY NEWTON, III; JAMES EDWARD MAY, II,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

versus

RICHARD YOUNG, Reg. Administrator; SERGEANT

PRUITT; MOSLEY, Correctional Officer; E. B.

WALKER, Major; DOW, Correctional Officer;

LIEUTENANT WHITE; R. M. LANDON; SERGEANT

WHITEHEAD; O. B. WHITE, Lieutenant,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. J. Calvitt Clarke, Jr., Senior

District Judge. (CA-95-829-2)

Submitted: December 14, 1995 Decided: January 18, 1996

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tides Jerry Newton, III, James Edward May, II, Appellants Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellants appeal from the district court's order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Newton v. Young, No. CA-95-829-2 (E.D. Va. Sept. 18, 1995).

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.

AFFIRMED
No. 09-833.

#### Thomas P. Lewis, Petitioner v. United States, et al.

559 U.S. 973, 130 S. Ct. 1713,

176 L. Ed. 2d 184,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2082.

March 1, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 336 Fed. Appx. 535.
No. 09-1038.

#### Arthur C. Wagner, Jr., et al., Petitioners v. Live Nation Motor Sports, Inc., fka SFX Motor Sports, Inc., dba Clear Channel Entertainment-Motor Sports, et al.

559 U.S. 1107, 130 S. Ct. 2405,

176 L. Ed. 2d 924,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3835.

May 3, 2010.

Petition for writ of certio-rari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 586 F.3d 1237.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 99.3

                                906 CERTIFICATION

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company
for the period ended March 31, 2003, I, William E. Elliott, President, Chief
Executive Officer of Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:

(1)      such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2003,
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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
period ended March 31, 2003, fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of Plumas Bancorp.

Dated: May 12, 2003

                         /s/  William E. Elliott
                        ------------------------
Exhibit 10.12

 

DEED OF ASSIGNMENT

 

THIS ASSIGNMENT (the “Assignment”) is made on the 16th day of November 2005 by and between PERENCO OIL AND GAS (CAMEROON) LTD. whose principal place of business is at BP 1225, Douala, Cameroon (hereinafter referred to as “PERENCO”) and KOSMOS ENERGY CAMEROON HC, whose principal place of business is at [8401 North Central Expressway, Suite 280, Dallas, Texas 75230] (hereinafter referred to as “KOSMOS”).

 

WITNESSETH THAT :

 

(A)          By a Decree 2005/249 dated 30 June 2005 PERENCO and Société Nationale des Hydrocarbures (“SNH”) were granted the Kombe-Nsepe Permit, Cameroon (the “Permit”); and

 

(B)           PERENCO and SNH are parties to a Convention d’Etablissement and a Contrat d’Association dated 11 December 1997 (the two collectively the “Contract”) previously governing the Kombe and Nsepe Permits and which continue to govern the Permit; and

 

(C)           PERENCO wishes to transfer and assign to KOSMOS a thirty five per cent (35%) undivided participating interest in, under and pursuant to the Permit and, to the extent it relates to the Permit, the Contract.

 

NOW THEREFORE in consideration of the premises and mutual covenants made herein and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereby agree as follows :

 

1.             PERENCO hereby transfers and assigns to KOSMOS a thirty five per cent (35%) undivided participating interest in, under and pursuant to the Permit and, to the extent it relates to the Permit, the Contract.

 

2.             This Assignment is made subject to, and KOSMOS agrees to be bound by, all of the terms, provisions and conditions of the Permit and, to the extent it relates to the Permit, the Contract and all amendments thereto and all laws, rules and regulations of Cameroon insofar as they apply or relate to the Permit and the Contract or the area covered thereby.

 

WITNESS OUR HANDS this 16th day of November 2005.

 

	
ATTEST:
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
Signed by :
    	
/s/ PERENCO OIL AND GAS (CAMEROON) LTD.
    
	
Witness
    	
Name :
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
Title :
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
For and on behalf of 
   PERENCO OIL AND GAS (CAMEROON) LTD.
    
					


 











 

	
ATTEST:
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
Signed by :
    	
/s/ KOSMOS ENERGY CAMEROON HC
    
	
Witness
    	
Name : 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
Title :
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
For and on behalf of 
   KOSMOS ENERGY CAMEROON HC
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announces the aforementioned meeting.

*Time and Date:*                         1 p.m.-4 p.m., March 26, 2009 (Closed).                    

*Place:*                         Teleconference.                    

*Status:*                         The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with provisions set forth in Section 552b(c)(4) and (6), Title 5 U.S.C., and the Determination of the Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463.                    

*Matters to be Discussed:*                         The meeting will include the review, discussion, and evaluation of the application received in response to “Data Coordinating Center for Autism and Other Development Disabilities                               ( print page 10594)                            Research, PA DD09-002; and the supplements received for Epidemiologic and Surveillance and Epidemiologic Research of Duchenne and Becker Muscular Dystrophy, PA DD06-002.”                    

*For Further Information Contact:*                         Geneva L. Cashaw, Designated Federal Official, CDC, 4770 Buford Highway, NE., Mailstop K-92, Telephone (770) 488-8390.                    

                        The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign                         **Federal Register**                         notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both CDC and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.                    

Dated: March 4, 2009.

Elaine L. Baker,

Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

[FR Doc. E9-5117 Filed 3-10-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
No. 09-8947.

#### Alice Richards-Johnson, Petitioner v. American Express.

559 U.S. 1051, 130 S. Ct. 2347,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3079,

176 L. Ed. 2d 567,

April 5, 2010.

Petition for writ of certio-rari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
No. 09-868.

#### Ashbel T. Wall, II, Director, Rhode Island Department of Corrections, Petitioner v. Khalil Kholi.

560 U.S. 903, 130 S. Ct. 3274,

176 L. Ed. 2d 1181,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 4006.

May 17, 2010.

Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis *1182granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit granted.

Same case below, 582 F.3d 147.
No. 09-9847.

#### Bill Watson, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 1101, 130 S. Ct. 2393,

176 L. Ed. 2d 783,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3583.

April 26, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2013-0018 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2013-CE-049-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

No Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes, 

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously 

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD: 

If NO, we don’t agree because 

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD:
Page 2 of 3

If NO, we don’t agree because 

For additional issues, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date