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

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5814 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5814

           To adapt to changing crude oil market conditions.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            December 9, 2014

 Mr. Barton (for himself and Mr. Bridenstine) introduced the following 
 bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and 
  in addition to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, 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 adapt to changing crude oil market conditions.

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

SECTION 1. FINDINGS.

    The Congress finds that--
            (1) the United States has enjoyed a renaissance in energy 
        production, establishing the United States as the world's 
        leading oil producer;
            (2) the United States upholds a commitment to free trade 
        and open markets and has consistently opposed attempts by other 
        nations to restrict the free flow of energy; and
            (3) the United States should remove all restrictions on the 
        export of crude oil, which will provide domestic economic 
        benefits, enhanced energy security, and flexibility in foreign 
        diplomacy.

SEC. 2. REPEAL.

    Section 103 of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 
6212) and the item relating thereto in the table of contents of that 
Act are repealed.

SEC. 3. NATIONAL POLICY ON OIL EXPORT RESTRICTION.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, to promote the 
efficient exploration, production, storage, supply, marketing, pricing, 
and regulation of energy resources, including fossil fuels, no official 
of the Federal Government shall impose or enforce any restriction on 
the export of crude oil.

SEC. 4. STUDY AND RECOMMENDATIONS.

    Not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this Act, 
the Secretary of Energy shall conduct a study and transmit to the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and 
the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate 
recommendations on the appropriate size, composition, and purpose of 
the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served through ECF on the debtor’s attorney or by U.S. First Class 

pre-paid Mail on the pro se debtor on the same day filed with the Court.

Submitted by:

NANCY K. NEIDICH, ESQ, STANDING CHAPTER 13 TRUSTEE

P.O. BOX 279806, MIRAMAR, FL 33027, (954) 443-4402

RE: ARMANDO MOHEDANO CASE NUMBER:21-10748-AJC

TRUSTEE'S NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY FOR CONFIRMATION AND RECOMMENDATION

The Trustee reviewed this case and found the following deficiencies remain unresolved from the Trustee’s letter 

requesting documents and prior deficiencies and thus objects as follows (If this case is dismissed, this 

deficiency is an objection to reinstatement until all documents are received or all issues are addressed): 

WRITTEN RESPONSE TO ISSUES RAISED AND/OR DOCUMENTS REQUESTED MUST BE 

RECEIVED BY 5PM AT LEAST FIFTEEN DAYS (NOT INCLUDING HOLIDAYS) PRIOR TO THE 

CONFIRMATION HEARING TO AVOID DISMISSAL. Please note: documents that were not timely 

filed/received by the trustee may not be considered as there is not sufficient time for an additional review of this 

case. Call the Trustee's case administration department prior to “re-sending” documents. The Trustee 

reserves the right to raise additional objections UNTIL all documents are timely provided to the Trustee and 

reviewed for possible issues raised and additional documents needed. 

The debtor or debtor’s attorney must appear at the confirmation hearing even if they pre-hear with the 

Trustee. The debtor may be dismissed for failure to fund the plan if they are delinquent in payments. 

The Court may dismiss this case if no one appears to represent the debtor at the confirmation hearing.

IMPORTANT NOTICE: IF THE DEBTOR(S) OBJECTS TO THE TRUSTEE'S RECOMMENDATION, THE 

DEBTOR'S ATTORNEY MUST CONTACT THE TRUSTEE'S OFFICE AND SPEAK TO AN ATTORNEY 

BEFORE 2PM THE LAST BUSINESS DAY PRIOR TO THE CONFIRMATION HEARING TO SEEK A 

RESOLUTION OR THE RECOMMENDATION WILL BE DEEMED UNCONTESTED BY THE DEBTOR. 

===============================================================================

Recommendation for April 27, 2021 hearing. All amendments and documents for the April 27, 2021

hearing were due as of April 9, 2021. (Call the Trustee's case administration department prior to "resending" documents)

1AP @ ECF#15

Serviced 21 days prior: YES DE#16 (3/1)

If counsel for the debtor(s) appears at confirmation, confirms service, and agrees on the record:

Continue to 5/25:

Due on or before 5pm on 5/7: 1) calculation of income, 2) evidence/calculation of 122-C line #13, #16, #17, 

#22 & #25, 3) amend plan to pay CMI/DI of $75,130.20, 4) non homestead info sheet for property in Jamaica

Case 21-10748-AJC Doc 29 Filed 04/21/21 Page 1 of 1
### NUMBER 13 - 1 7 - 00 457 - CV 

## COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________ CAROLINA FERNANDEZ , A ppellant ,
v. ADELANTE HOLDINGS LT D

. , A ppellee

.

____________________________________________________________

On a ppeal from the County Court at Law No. 5

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________



## MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Rodriguez, Benavides, and Longoria Memorandum Opinion by Justice Rodriguez Appellant, Carolina Fernandez, attemp t ed to perfect an appeal from an order signed on August 1, 2017 , in cause no. CL

- 17

- 2061

- E

. Upon review of the documents before the Court, it appeared that there was no final, appealable judgment dated August 1, 2017

. On August 18, 2017 , t he Clerk of this Court notified appellant of this defect so that steps could be taken to correct the defect, if it could be done. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P

.2

37.1, 42.3. Appellant was advised that, if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of th e notice, the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellant failed to respond to the Court ’ s notice. The trial court entered an “Order Rescinding and Setting Aside Previous Order” on August 1, 2017. The order rescinded a prior order signe d in error on July 27, 2017. In terms of appellate jurisdiction, appellate courts only have jurisdiction to review final judgments and certain interlocutory orders identified by statute. Lehmann v. Har

- Con Corp ., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). The Cou rt, having considered the documents on file and appellant's failure to correct the defect in this matter, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(a),(c). NELDA V. RODRIGUEZ Justice
D elivered and filed the 2nd day of November , 201 7

.
Exhibit 4.4


 


[LETTERHEAD OF TECK COMINCO LIMITED]


 


July 17, 2007


 


British Columbia Securities Commission


Alberta Securities Commission


Saskatchewan Financial Services Commission


The Manitoba Securities Commission


Ontario Securities Commission


Autorité des marchés financiers


New Brunswick Securities Commission


Nova Scotia Securities Commission


Prince Edward Island Securities Office


Securities Commission of Newfoundland and Labrador


Yukon Registrar of Securities


Northwest Territories Registrar of Securities


Nunavut Registrar of Securities


Toronto Stock Exchange


New York Stock Exchange


United States Securities and Exchange Commission


 


Dear Sirs:


 


	
  Re:

  	
  Teck Cominco Limited

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Consent of Expert

  	
   

  



 


In connection with the offer to purchase of Teck Cominco Limited  for all of the outstanding common shares of Aur Resources
Inc.  dated July 17, 2007 (the “Offer to
Purchase”), I hereby consent to the use of my name in connection with
references to my involvement in the preparation of the mineral reserve and
mineral resource estimates for Teck Cominco Limited’s  material
properties, other than Antamina, Elkview, Fording River, Greenhills, Coal
Mountain, Line Creek and Cardinal River (the “Estimates”) and to the use of the
Estimates, or portions thereof, in the following instances:


 


(a)                                  In  Teck Cominco Limited’s  Annual
Information Form dated February 26, 2007 (the “AIF”) under the heading “MINERAL
RESERVES AND RESOURCES – Mineral Reserves at December 31, 2006”; and


 


(b)                                 In the AIF under the
heading “MINERAL RESERVES AND RESOURCES – Mineral Resources at December 31, 2006”.


 


I also consent to the use of my name and references to the Estimates,
or portions thereof, and to the inclusion or incorporation by reference of
information derived from the Estimates in the Offer to Purchase and the
registration statement on Form F-8 filed with the United States 


 

















 


Securities Exchange Commission on July 17, 2007 of Teck Cominco
Limited (the “Registration Statement”).


 


I have read the Offer to Purchase and the Registration Statement of
Teck Cominco Limited and have no reason to believe that there are any
misrepresentations in the information contained therein that are derived from
the Estimates or that are within my knowledge as a result of the preparation of
the Estimates.


 


Yours truly,


 


/s/ PAUL C. BANKES


 


Paul C. Bankes, P.Geo


 


2
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED October 24, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-60551 Summary Calendar

LEON W. LAW, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus ROBERT JOHNSON, COMMISSIONER, MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; LAWRENCE KELLY, Superintendent, CMCF; ROBERT CULPEPPER, Director of Medical Services; DAVID CARLSON, Attending Physician; AHMED ZEIN, Attending Physician, Defendants-Appellees.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 3:02-CV-411-BN

-------------------- Before JONES, BENAVIDES, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Leon W. Law, Mississippi state prisoner # 088550, has filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) on appeal following the magistrate judge’s entry of an Agreed Judgment and the voluntary dismissal with prejudice of all remaining 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims against the defendants.No. 03-60551 -2- By moving for IFP status, Law is challenging the district court’s certification that IFP status should not be granted on appeal because his appeal is not taken in good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor , 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997). Law has failed to show that his appeal from the Agreed Judgment was taken in good faith. As the Agreed Judgment simply reflects the agreement of the parties, there was no ruling by he magistrate judge from which to appeal. Nor has Law filed a timely notice of appeal from any of the magistrate judge’s rulings as they pertain to Law’s attempts to enforce the Agreed Judgment. His request for IFP status is DENIED. See Baugh , 117 F.3d at 202. Furthermore, because the appeal is frivolous, it is
DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2. Law’s motions for the production of documents and for the appointment of counsel are also DENIED.
MOTIONS DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.
**Exhibit 35.2**

**SERVICERCOMPLIANCE STATEMENTCAPITAL ONE MULTI-ASSET EXECUTION TRUSTCAPITAL ONE MASTER TRUST**

Capital One Multi-assetExecution TrustCapital One Master TrustCapital One Bankc/o 140 East Shore DriveRoom 1071-BGlen Allen, Virginia 23060

In connection with theAnnual Report on Form 10-K of Capital One Multi-asset Execution Trust andCapital One Master Trust for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2006 (the “Report”),the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Capital One Services, Inc., (the “Servicer”),does hereby certify and represent that:

1.   A review of the activities and performanceof the Servicer under the Subservicing Agreement dated as of January 1, 2006 byand between Capital One Bank and the Servicer (the “Agreement”) during theperiod that is the subject of the Report has been made under my supervision.

2.   To the best of my knowledge, based on suchreview, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreementin all material respects throughout the period that is the subject of theReport.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, theundersigned has duly executed this Servicer Compliance Statement this 28th day of March 2007.

**CAPITAL ONE SERVICES, INC.**
| By:    | /s/ Jory A. Berson   |   |
|--------|--------------------------------|--------|
| Name:  | Jory A. Berson                 |   |
| Title: | President, U.S. Card           |   |

 

----
EPA SANITIZED Page 4 of 12




 

EPA SANITIZED Page 9 of 12
ALFER INVESTMENT CORP., et al., Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. SCHECHER GROUP, INC., Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D18-0584

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

JULY 09, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Granted. Dismissed.
### Served: February 11,2011 UNITED STATES OFAMERICA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department ofTransportation on the 11 th ofFebruary, 2011 Essential Air Service at 

### FORT DODGE, IOWA MASON CITY, IOWA WATERTOWN, SOUTH DAKOTA DOCKET 2001-10682 DOCKET 2001-1068<1'1 DOCKET 2001-10644 Under49 U.S.C. 41731 

### etse . NOTICE OF EXTENSION

Fort Dodge and Mason City, Iowa ByOrder 2011-1-12, January 14, 2011, we requested proposals for EAS at Fort Dodge and Mason City, Iowa, no laterthanMarch 1, 2011. The current contract expires onMay31, 2011. Watertown, South Dakota ByOrder 2011-1-23, January28,2011, we requested proposals for EAS at Watertown, South Dakota, no laterthan March 2, 2011. The current contract expires on July 31, 2011. Byemail dated February 10,2011, DeltaAirLines indicated it is in ongoingnegotiations with its Delta Connectionpartners, and those negotiations will not be completed in time for it to respond to the current deadlines for proposals at the three communities, and requested an extension to April 5, 2011, for all three communities. We have decided to grant Delta's request, as the additional amount oftime is not unreasonable. All parties must now file competitive proposals for EAS at Fort Dodge and Mason City, Iowa, and Watertown, South Dakota, no laterthan April 5, 2011.



### Dennis DeVany, Chief, EAS and Domestic Analysis An electronic version ofthis document is available onthe World Wide Web at http://www.regulations.gov
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 67 (Friday, April 5, 1996)]
[Corrections]
[Page 15338]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: X96-50405]



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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-36955; File No. SR-NASD-95-59]


Self-Regulatory Organizations; Order Approving Proposed Rule 
Change by National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc., To Amend 
Section 65 of the Uniform Practice Code To Require Members Who Are 
Participants in a Registered Clearing Agency To Use the Electronic 
Facilities of Such Agency To Transmit Customer Account Transfer 
Instructions

Correction

    In notice document 96-6322, beginning on page 11070 in the issue of 
Monday, March 18, 1996, in the third column, the Release number should 
read as set forth above.

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: CoreCast

Filters

              - (-)multimedia_video(1)
              - multimedia_video-149225(1)

## By Location

              - alaska(1)
              - montana(1)
              - north carolina(3)
              - oregon(1)
              - (-)puerto rico(1)
              - south carolina(1)
              - washington(1)

## By Year

Podcasts        October 31, 2011        Climate Connections: Questions from Puerto Rico
Exhibit 32.1



Certification of Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)



In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2005 (the Report) of UTEK Corporation (the
Registrant), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Clifford M. Gross, the Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:



(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15
(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and



(2)
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.



|                      |  |                  
|--------------------- |  | -----------------
|/s/ Clifford M. Gross
|Name:                 |  | Clifford M. Gross
|Date:                 |  | November 4, 2005 



Page 37 of 38
Kristin Lee Guoan FISHER, Appellant, v. Barry HOEY, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-4295

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed September 12, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 235 (Friday, December 6, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 97072]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-28743]

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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Bureau of Prisons

Annual Determination of Average Cost of Incarceration Fee (COIF)

AGENCY: Bureau of Prisons, Justice.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to regulations, the Bureau of Prisons publishes the 
Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 Cost of Incarceration Fee (COIF) for Federal 
inmates.

DATES: December 6, 2024.

ADDRESSES: Office of General Counsel, Federal Bureau of Prisons, 320 
First Street NW, Washington, DC 20534.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel J. Crooks III, Assistant 
General Counsel/Rules Administrator, Federal Bureau of Prisons, at the 
address above or at (202) 353-4885.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations, 
part 505, allows for assessment of a fee to cover the average cost of 
incarceration for Federal inmates. We calculate the cost of 
incarceration fee (COIF) by dividing the number representing the Bureau 
of Prisons (Bureau) facilities' monetary obligation (excluding 
activation costs) by the number of inmate-days incurred for the fiscal 
year, and then by multiplying the quotient by the number of days in the 
fiscal year.
    Based on FY 2023 data, the average annual COIF for a Federal inmate 
housed in a Bureau or non-Bureau facility in FY 2023 was $44,090 
($120.80 per day). The average annual COIF for a Federal inmate housed 
in a Residential Reentry Center for FY 2023 was $41,437 ($113.53 per 
day). (Please note: There were 365 days in FY 2023.)

James Wills,
Assistant Director/General Counsel, Federal Bureau of Prisons.
[FR Doc. 2024-28743 Filed 12-5-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-05-P
```
### IN THE NINTH COURT OF APPEALS

_____________________ _____ 09

- 17

- 00306

- CR

__________________________

_________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the 9th District Court of Montg omery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 17

- 05

- 05540

- CR

_________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT
THE NINTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be a ffirmed. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, in accordance with the Court’s opinion, that the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Opinion of the Court delivered by Justice Leanne Johnson

December 13, 2017
AFFIRMED

********** Copies of this judgment and the Cour t’s opinion are certified for observance.

Carol Anne Harley Clerk of the Court John Mark Bass

v. The State of Texas
Henry Antawon FLORENCE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-3282

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed June 8, 2018.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Order entered March 7, 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 18
- 00470
- CV JOHN DOE I, INDIVIDU ALLY AND AS NEXT FRI END OF JOHN DOE II, A MINOR, Appellant s V.
RIPLEY ENTERTAINMENT, INC., AND JIM PATTISON U. S.A., INC., Appellee s

On Appeal from the 44th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC
- 15
- 07174



### O RDER
We REINSTATE this appeal. By order dated February 13, 2019, we abated this appeal to allow the trial court to sign a final judgment. On March 5, 2019 , a supplemental clerk’s record was filed containing the final judgment and the other documents requested in this Court’s order. Because appellants filed their brief before the final jud gment was signed, they shall file any amended brief by March 22, 2019 . Appellees’ brief shall be filed by April 22, 2019

. /s/ ERIN A. NOWELL JUSTICE
Yaneth Carolina Dos Santos ROBLES, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. M. Barbara AMARO, etc., Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D17-1048

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

APRIL 20, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Stephen Wayne Clifford DORSEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-1600

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed September 25, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential.



# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

IN RE: POLARIS EXECUTIVE CENTER, LLC, DBA GENESIS VILLAGE, Appellant

______________________

2022

- 1119

______________________

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Trademark Trial and Appeal Board in No.

88624647.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

A RNOLD B RAUN

, Law Department, Medical Diagnostic Laboratories, Hamilton, NJ, argued for appellant Polaris Executive Center, LLC.

B ENJAMIN T. H ICKMAN

, Office of the Solicitor, UnitedStates Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria, VA, argued for appellee Katherine K. Vidal. Also rep resented by

T HOMAS L. C ASAGRANDE

, C HRISTINA J. H IEBER

, T HOMAS W.

K RAUSE

, F ARHEENA Y ASMEEN R ASHEED

.

______________________

T HIS C AUSE ha ving been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED : Case: 22-1119 Document: 43 Page: 1 Filed: 01/17/2023P ER C URIAM (N EWMAN

, C HEN

, and C UNNINGHAM

, Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED. See Fed . Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

January 17, 2023

Date /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner
Peter R. Marksteiner
Clerk of Court Case: 22-1119 Document: 43 Page: 2 Filed: 01/17/2023