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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 123 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 123

     To amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and 
     Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to 
 participate in the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Wildomar 
   Service Area Recycled Water Distribution Facilities and Alberhill 
        Wastewater Treatment and Reclamation Facility Projects.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 2005

   Mr. Issa (for himself, Mr. Calvert, and Mrs. Bono) introduced the 
    following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To amend the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and 
     Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to 
 participate in the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Wildomar 
   Service Area Recycled Water Distribution Facilities and Alberhill 
        Wastewater Treatment and Reclamation Facility Projects.

    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 ``Elsinore Valley Municipal Water 
District Wastewater and Recycled Water Facilities Act of 2005''.

SEC. 2. PROJECT AUTHORIZATION.

    (a) In General.--The Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study 
and Facilities Act (Public Law 102-575, title XVI; 43 U.S.C. 390h et 
seq.) is amended by adding after section 1636 the following:

``SEC. 1637. ELSINORE VALLEY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT PROJECTS, 
              CALIFORNIA.

    ``(a) Authorization.--The Secretary, in cooperation with the 
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District, California, may participate 
in the design, planning, and construction of permanent facilities 
needed to establish recycled water distribution and wastewater 
treatment and reclamation facilities that will be used to treat 
wastewater and provide recycled water in the Elsinore Valley Municipal 
Water District, California.
    ``(b) Cost Sharing.--The Federal share of the cost of each project 
described in subsection (a) shall not exceed 25 percent of the total 
cost of the project.
    ``(c) Limitation.--Funds provided by the Secretary under this 
section shall not be used for operation or maintenance of the projects 
described in subsection (a).
    ``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be 
appropriated to carry out this section $12,500,000.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections in section 2 of 
Public Law 102-575 is amended by inserting after the item relating to 
section 1636 the following:

``1637. Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Projects, 
                            California.''.
                                 <all>
```
NUMBER 13-18-00426-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________

VELMA RUTH FLYNN AND PLAZA 

CENTER, LLC, Appellants,

v.

ZENIA MARROQUIN AND LITTLE 

GREEN APPLES, INC., Appellees.

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 92nd District Court 

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Longoria and Perkes

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Perkes

This appeal was abated by this Court on October 31, 2018, to allow the parties the 

opportunity to engage in settlement negotiations. This cause is now before the Court on 

appellants’ unopposed motion to dismiss the appeal. Appellants request that this Court 

dismiss the appeal. Accordingly, this case is hereby REINSTATED.
2

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellants’ motion to 

dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 42.1(a). Appellants’ motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is hereby 

DISMISSED. In accordance with the agreement of the parties, costs are taxed against 

the party incurring same. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(d). Having dismissed the appeal at 

appellants’ request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will 

issue forthwith.

GREGORY T. PERKES

Justice

Delivered and filed the

4th day of April, 2019.
STIPULATION TO DISMISS DEFENDANT WELLS FARGO; PROPOSED ORDER - 1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

SCOTT J. SAGARIA (SBN 217981)

ELLIOT W. GALE (SBN 263326)

JOE ANGELO (SBN 268542)

SAGARIA LAW, P.C.

2033 Gateway Place, 6th Floor

San Jose, CA 95110

408-279-2288 ph: 408-279-2299 fax

Attorneys for Plaintiff

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – OAKLAND DIVISION

TRACEY MCGIVNEY,

Plaintiff,

v.

EQUIFAX, INC.; et. al.,

 

 Defendants.

Case No.: 4:17-cv-00346-SBA

STIPULATION TO DISMISS DEFENDANT

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.; PROPOSED 

ORDER

TO THE COURT, CLERK OF COURT, AND ALL PARTIES:

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between plaintiff Tracey McGivney and 

defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Wells Fargo”), that Wells Fargo be dismissed from this 

action with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, section 41(a)(2), and that 

each party shall bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs. 

//

//

Case 4:17-cv-00346-SBA Document 17 Filed 03/16/17 Page 1 of 2
STIPULATION TO DISMISS DEFENDANT WELLS FARGO; PROPOSED ORDER - 2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

DATED: March 16, 2017 Sagaria Law, P.C.

By: /s/ Elliot W. Gale

Elliot W. Gale

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Tracey McGivney

DATED: March 16, 2017 Severson & Werson APC

By: /s/ Alisa Givental

 Alisa Givental

Attorneys for Defendant

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

I, Elliot Gale, am the ECF user whose identification and password are being used to file this 

Stipulation. I hereby attest that Alisa Givental has concurred in this filing.

/s/ Elliot Gale

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Pursuant to the stipulation of the Parties, Defendant Wells Fargo is dismissed with 

prejudice and that each party shall bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:

SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

March 16, 2017

Case 4:17-cv-00346-SBA Document 17 Filed 03/16/17 Page 2 of 2
Kenneth Dewayne NEWSOME, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-3753

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed July 2, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Ryan TOWNSEND, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-0584

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 13, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mandamus is denied.
|Exhibit 32.2
|------------

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Asia Electrical Power International Group Inc. a Nevada corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Xiaoling Chen, Chief Accounting Officer Secretary of the Company, certifies to the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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/ Xiaoling ChenXiaoling ChenChief Accounting Officer and SecretaryAugust 12, 2008

---
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document









































 
 

  Exhibit 10.15    
    


 Summary of Director Compensation  


        We pay our non-employee directors, who consist of all our directors other than our chief executive officer, an annual fee
of $75,000 for their services as directors. We pay an annual fee of $20,000 to the chair of the compensation committee, $10,000 to the chairs of the executive committee and the nominating and
corporate governance committee, and $5,000 to each non-employee director who serves as a member, but not the chair, of any committee for service on each committee above one. We currently
pay an annual fee of $40,000 to the chair of our audit committee, which will be reduced to an annual fee of $25,000 starting on June 15, 2009. Our chairman also also receives an annual fee of
$125,000, as well as office space, support services, and healthcare benefits for his services as chairman of our board. Directors who are employees do not receive separate fees for their services as
directors. All of the payments described in this paragraph are made in cash. 



        Under
the terms of our 2006 equity incentive plan, each director who is not employed by, and does not provide independent contractor services as a consultant or advisor to, us or our
subsidiaries receives automatic restricted stock awards. We refer to these directors as our "outside directors." Currently, our outside directors are Basil L. Anderson, William F. Concannon, Ronald T.
Maheu, Rowland T. Moriarty, Nancy L. Rose and William T. Schleyer. Each outside director who is re-elected as one of our directors or whose term continues after the annual meeting will, on
the date of the annual meeting, receive a restricted stock award, vesting in four equal annual installments beginning on the first anniversary of the date of grant, valued at $75,000, based on the
closing price of our common stock as of that date. Each person who is first elected an outside director at the annual meeting will receive, on the date of his or her election, a restricted stock
award, vesting in four equal annual installments beginning on the first anniversary of the date of grant, in an amount to be determined by our board of directors. 











QuickLinks



Exhibit 10.15
Tacordon RIGGINS, DOC #V37815, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-3468

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed July 3, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
TKP

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 23-0078

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

MICHEL SCOTT DULANEY,

Defendant and Appellant.

GRANT OF EXTENSION

Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 30-day extension of time, 

and good cause appearing therefor, Appellee is granted an extension of time to

and including June 8, 2024, within which to prepare, file, and serve the State’s

response brief.

Electronically signed by:

Bowen Greenwood

Clerk of the Supreme Court

May 6 2024

05/06/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0078
Kristopher BEAN, petitioner, v. Connie GIPSON, Warden.

No. 12-9390.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 28, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
<PAGE>



                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                      Statement of Chief Executive Officer
         Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code


         Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code, the
undersigned, Joseph L. Castle II, the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of
Castle Energy Corporation (the "Company"), hereby certifies that:

I.       The Company's Form 10-Q Quarterly Report for the quarter ended December
         31, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section
         13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

II.      The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
         the Company.

Dated:   February 13, 2004                     /s/  JOSEPH L. CASTLE II
                                               -----------------------------
                                               Joseph L. Castle II
                                               Chief Executive Officer

         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Castle Energy Corporation and will be retained by Castle Energy
Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 86 (Thursday, May 4, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 22049]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11055]



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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[C-333-402]


Determination To Revoke Countervailing Duty Order; Certain 
Apparel from Peru

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of determination to revoke countervailing duty order.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is revoking the 
countervailing duty order on certain apparel from Peru because it is no 
longer of interest to interested parties.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 1, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Albright, Office of 
Countervailing Compliance, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
2786.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On March 1, 1995, the Department published in the Federal Register 
(60 FR 11075) its intent to revoke the countervailing duty order on 
certain apparel from Peru (48 FR 9871; March 12, 1985). Additionally, 
as required by 19 CFR 355.25(d)(4)(ii)(1994), the Department served, by 
certified mail, written notice of its intent to revoke this 
countervailing duty order on each party listed on its most current 
service list.

Determination to Revoke

    The Department may revoke a countervailing duty order if it 
concludes that the order is no longer of interest to interested 
parties. We conclude that there is no interest in a countervailing duty 
order when no interested party (as defined in sections 355.2 (i)(3), 
(i)(4), (i)(5), and (i)(6) of the Department's regulations) has 
requested an administrative review for at least five consecutive review 
periods and when no domestic interested party objects to the revocation 
(19 CFR 355.25(d)(4)(iii)).
    We received no requests for administrative review for the previous 
five consecutive review periods and no objections to our notice of 
intent to revoke the countervailing duty order. Therefore, we have 
concluded that the countervailing duty order on certain apparel from 
Peru is no longer of interest to interested parties, and we are 
revoking this countervailing duty order in accordance with 19 CFR 
355.25(d)(4)(iii).
    Further, as required by 19 CFR 355.25(d)(5), the Department is 
terminating the suspension of liquidation on the subject merchandise as 
of the effective date of this notice, and will instruct the Customs 
Service to liquidate, without regard to countervailing duties, all 
unliquidated entries of this merchandise exported from Peru on or after 
January 1, 1995.
    This notice is published in accordance with 19 CFR 
355.25(d)(4)(iii).

    Dated: April 18, 1995.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Compliance.
[FR Doc. 95-11055 Filed 5-3-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
T.H.C. SELECT, INC., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. DYNOTEC PLASTIC, INC., and Tony Dodaro, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-0437

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

July 18, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Certiorari is dismissed.
Melissa CASTLEBERRY, petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 12-7620.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 3, 2013.

Petition for rehearing denied.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 39 (Tuesday, February 28, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 10841]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-4825]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Project No. 2306-016-VT]


Citizens Utilities Companies; Notice of Intent to Hold a Public 
Meeting in Newport, Vermont, to Discuss Staff's Draft Environmental 
Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Clyde River Hydroelectric Project

February 22, 1995.
    On February 3, 1995, the Commission staff mailed the Clyde River 
DEIS to the Environmental Protection Agency, resource and land 
management agencies, and interested organizations and individuals. This 
document evaluates the environmental consequences of operating the 
applicant's existing 6.5-megawatt (MW) hydroelectric project, located 
on the Clyde River in northern Vermont, near the town of Newport.
    The applicant proposes to: (1) Operate run-of-river at the Seymore 
Lake, Echo Pond, and West Charleston developments; (2) limit pond 
fluctuations at the Newport 1,2,3 development; provide minimum flows in 
the bypassed reaches of West Charleston and Newport No. 11 developments 
and the lower bypass reach of the Newport 1,2,3 development; provide a 
fish passage flow and various enhancements for recreation and other 
environmental resources.
    The subject DEIS also evaluates the environmental effects of: (1) 
The project as proposed; (2) the proposed project with additional 
modifications and enhancements;(3) removal of Newport No. 11 dam with 
and without repowering the Newport No. 11 powerhouse; and (4) the no 
action alternative.
    The public meetings on the Clyde River Project will be recorded by 
an official stenographer. The meeting will be held from 7:00 P.M. to 
11:00 P.M. on Tuesday, March 14, 1995, at the North Country Union High 
School on Veterans Avenue in Newport, Vermont.
    At the subject meeting, resource agency personnel and other 
interested persons will have the opportunity to provide oral and 
written comments and recommendations regarding the Clyde River DEIS for 
the Commission's public record.
    For further information, please contact Kathleen Sherman, at (202) 
219-2834.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 94-4825 Filed 2-27-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Exhibit 35.4

SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT

Discover Products Inc.

Discover Card Master Trust I

The undersigned, a duly authorized representative of Discover Products Inc. (DPI), hereby certifies that:



|(a) | A review of the activities of DPI for the eleven months ended November 30, 2011 and of its performance under the Servicing Agreement, dated January 1, 2011,
by and between DPI and Discover Bank (the Agreement) was made under my supervision.
|--- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(b) | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, DPI has fulfilled all of its obligations in all material respects under the Agreement for the eleven months ended
November 30, 2011.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 21st day of
February 2012.



| | By: | /s/ James V.
Panzarino
| | --- | ----------------------

James V. Panzarino,

Executive Vice President
Wade WHITE v. COX OPERATING, LLC

NO. 2019-C-0617

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 17, 2019

Denied.
Exhibit 31.1


CERTIFICATION





I, Fred Zolla, certify that:





1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of IMedicor, Inc;





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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;





4. The small business issuer's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:





a.  designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;





b. evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period (the “Evaluation Date”); and





c.   presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;





5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):





a. all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and





b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.





6.  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have indicated in this quarterly report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.








/s/ Fred Zolla


Fred Zolla


President and Chief Executive Officer


(Principal Executive Officer)


Date: October 13, 2010
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

ZURIEL KEN 'DELLE ASH,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D17-3808

[November 1, 2018]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, 

Okeechobee County; Dan L. Vaughn, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

17000333CFAXMX.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Paul Edward Petillo, 

Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Jessenia J. 

Concepcion, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

DAMOORGIAN, CIKLIN, JJ., and KANNER DANIEL J., Associate Judge, concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.