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

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5912 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

313 East Main Street in Robstown, Texas, as the ‘‘Lieutenant Juan 

G. Carrion Post Office Building’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 28, 2010 

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

on Oversight and Government Reform 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 313 East Main Street in Robstown, Texas, 

as the ‘‘Lieutenant Juan G. Carrion Post Office Building’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LIEUTENANT JUAN G. CARRION POST OFFICE 

4 BUILDING. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

6 Postal Service located at 313 East Main Street in 

7 Robstown, Texas, shall be known and designated as the 

8 ‘‘Lieutenant Juan G. Carrion Post Office Building’’. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5912 IH

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Lieutenant Juan G. 

5 Carrion Post Office Building’’. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit
4.9


 





 


April 13, 2010


 


Consent of Robert Wares, P. Geo


Board of Directors, Osisko Mining Corporation


United States Securities and Exchange Commission


 


To the Board of Directors of Osisko Mining
Corporation (the “Company”)


 


I, Robert Wares, P. Geo and Chief Operating Officer
of the Company, consent to:


 


1.                                       The
incorporation by reference in the Offer and Circular of the Company, included
as part of the Company’s Registration Statement on Form F-8 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission, of the description of the reports that
were prepared under my direct supervision of certain mineral reserves at
Canadian Malartic Project as at December 2008 and March 2010.


 


2.                                       The information
that forms the summary of the reports of the description of project and other
information pertaining to the Canadian Malartic Project and to the use of my
name under the Offer and Circular and Registration Statement as a named expert.


 


	
  Dated
  as of the 13th day of April, 2010

  
	
   

  
	
  SIGNED

  
	
   

  
	
   

  
	
  /s/
  Robert Wares

  	
   

  
	
  Robert Wares

  



 


1100,
De la Gauchetiére Ouest, bureau 300, Montréal, Québec, Canada H3C 3E4

Téléphone (514) 735-7131 – Télécopieur (514) 933-3290

osisko.com
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6177 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to ensure the timeliness of information used in considering a member of the Armed Forces for an administrative separation, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 22, 2010 

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

on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to ensure the timeliness of information used in considering a member of 

the Armed Forces for an administrative separation, 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. USE OF CURRENT INFORMATION IN CONSID4 ERING A MEMBER OF THE ARMED FORCES 

5 FOR ADMINISTRATIVE SEPARATION. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 59 of title 10, United 

7 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol8 lowing new section: 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6177 IH

1 ‘‘§ 1179. Administrative separation: use of current in2 formation regarding member 

3 ‘‘(a) TIMELINESS OF INFORMATION CONSIDERED.— 

4 If a member of the armed forces is being considered under 

5 applicable regulations for administrative separation, inci6 dents involving the member and information regarding the 

7 actions of the member occurring more than 10 years be8 fore the date of the proceedings may not be taken into 

9 consideration. 

10 ‘‘(b) EXCEPTIONS.—Subsection (a) does not apply 

11 if— 

12 ‘‘(1) the member consents to the consideration 

13 of the earlier information; or 

14 ‘‘(2) the information was concealed by the 

15 member or another person acting on behalf of the 

16 member.’’. 

17 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

18 at the beginning of such chapter is amended by at the 

19 end the following new item: 

‘‘1179. Administrative separation: use of current information regarding member.’’. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
(85 South. 789)

#### ANDERSON v. STATE.

(6 Div. 26.)

(Supreme Court of Alabama.

June 30, 1920.)

Criminal law <&wkey;l 104(3) — Order for .special venire need not appear in transcript in absence of question raised in court beiow as to its validity.

Where no question was raised in the court below as to the validity of a special venire, it was unnecessary that the order for the special venire appear in the transcript upon appeal, under Acts 1915, p. 708, and Supreme Court rule 27, as amended (198 Ala. xv, 77 South, vii).

Sayre and Brown, JJ., dissenting.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Tuscaloosa County; Henry B. Foster, Judge.

Roy 'Anderson was convicted of murder in the first degree, and appeals.

Affirmed.

J. Q. Smith, Atty. Gen., for the State.

GARDNER, J.

Appellant was convicted of murder in the first degree, and sentenced to life imprisonment in the penitentiary. The appeal is upon the record only, there being no bill of exceptions.

The order for the special venire is similar to that found in Duff Walker v. State, 85 South. 787,1 present term, which determines this question adversely to appellant. But, in addition to this, there was in the instant case no question raised in the court below as to the venire in any manner, and under the provisions of Acts 1915. p. 708, and Supreme Court rule 27 as amended (198 Ala. xv, 77 South, vii), it wag unnecessary that the order appear in the transcript upon this appeal.

No other matter appearing in the transcript calls for comment. Suffice it to say, an examination of the record discloses no reversible error, and the judgment of conviction will be-affirmed.

Affirmed.

ANDERSON, C. J., and MeCLEDLAN, SOMERVILLE, and THOMAS, JJ., concur.

SAYRE and BROWN, JJ., dissent.

1

 AnteJ p 474.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                           9,641
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  111,958
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     23,319
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               162,012
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 492,337
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           95,730
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            16
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   492,337
<SALES>                                        251,645
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               251,645
<CGS>                                        (189,951)
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                (189,951)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (64,391)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (4,631)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (7,057)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       821
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (7,894)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (7,894)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.48)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.48)


</TABLE>
II 

Calendar No. 668 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6237 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 17, 2010 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

DECEMBER 1, 2010 

Reported by Mr. LIEBERMAN, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 1351 2nd Street in Napa, California, as the 

‘‘Tom Kongsgaard Post Office Building’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. TOM KONGSGAARD POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

5 Postal Service located at 1351 2nd Street in Napa, Cali6 fornia, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Tom 

7 Kongsgaard Post Office Building’’. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6237 RS

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Tom Kongsgaard Post 

5 Office Building’’. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS

smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 668 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6237 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostBuilding’’. California, as the ‘‘Tom Kongsgaard Post Office al Service located at 1351 2nd Street in Napa, 

DECEMBER 1, 2010 

Reported without amendment 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
##### 



UNITED STATESSECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549
    FORM 10-Q/A (Mark One) þ
    
    QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2004
 or o
    
    TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 For the transition period from __________________ to ___________________
 Commission File Number: 1-13625 EOP OPERATING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
 Delaware
    
    36-4156801(State or other jurisdiction of
    
    (I.R.S. Employerincorporation or organization)
    
    Identification No.)Two North Riverside Plaza,Suite 2100, Chicago, Illinois
    
    60606(Address of principal executive offices)
    
    (Zip code)
 (312) 466-3300(Registrants telephone number, including area code) Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports
required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the
registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such
filing requirements for the past
90 days.  þ  Yes     o  No Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as
defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).  þ  Yes     o  No On April 30, 2004, 451,968,841 Units were outstanding.




---



##### 



EXPLANATORY NOTE EOP Operating Limited Partnership is filing this Form 10-Q/A for the sole
purpose of correcting Exhibits 31.1 and 32.1 that were included with the
original Form 10-Q filed on May 10, 2004 for the quarter ended March 31, 2004.
The following information in the Exhibits has been changed:  
    
    the execution dates of the Certifications included as Exhibit 31.1
    
    the reference to the quarterly period in paragraph (a), and execution
dates of Exhibit 32.1




---



##### 



SIGNATURES Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned thereunto duly authorized. EOP OPERATING LIMITED PARTNERSHIPBy:
    EQUITY OFFICE PROPERTIES TRUSTits general partner Date: November 29, 2004 By:
    /s/ RICHARD D. KINCAIDRichard D. KincaidPresident and Chief Executive Officer Date: November 29, 2004 By:
    /s/ MARSHA C. WILLIAMSMarsha C. WilliamsExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>   1
GENE LOGIC INC.
JUNE 30, 2000
EXHIBIT 11.1



                Statement Re: Computation of Per Share Loss
                 (In thousands, except per share amounts)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                 Three Months Ended        Six Months Ended
                                                       June 30,                June 30,
                                                --------------------    ----------------------
                                                  2000        1999         2000         1999
                                                ---------   --------    ---------     --------
<S>                                           <C>          <C>          <C>          <C>
BASIC AND DILUTED:

Weighted average common shares outstanding        25,511     19,797       24,505       19,754

Net loss                                         $(5,057)   $(4,385)    $(10,041)     $(9,334)
                                                =========   ========    =========     ========
Net loss per common share                        $ (0.20)   $ (0.22)    $  (0.41)     $ (0.47)
                                                =========   ========    =========     ========
</TABLE>
#### Ederlinda Tirona BATOON; Ailene Rose Batoon, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 09-70765.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 5, 2011.*

Filed April 27, 2011.

Ravit Rae Halperin, Immigration Law Offices of R. Rae Halperin, Lancaster, CA, for Petitioners.

OIL, Carol Federighi, Esquire, U.S. Department of Justice, Theo Nickerson, Esquire, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Before: B. FLETCHER, CLIFTON, and BEA, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Ederlinda Tirona Batoon and Ailene Rose Batoon, natives and citizens of the Philippines, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen deportation proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing for abuse of discretion, *Itumbarria v. INS,*321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), we deny the petition for review.

*681The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying petitioners’ third and untimely motion to reopen, because the BIA considered the evidence submitted and acted within its broad discretion in determining that the evidence was insufficient to warrant reopening. *See Singh v. INS,*295 F.3d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir.2002) (The BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen shall be reversed if it is “arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law.”); *In re Gutierrez-Lopez,*21 I. & N. Dec. 479, 480 (BIA 1996) (“A case may not be administratively closed if opposed by either of the parties.”).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 08-8396

STEVE MORRISON, 

 Plaintiff - Appellant, 

 v. 

MATTHEW W. PENNELL, 

 Defendant - Appellee. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Graham C. Mullen, 

Senior District Judge. (5:08-cv-00127-GCM) 

Submitted: March 17, 2009 Decided: March 23, 2009 

Before TRAXLER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. 

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Steve Morrison, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

Steve Morrison appeals the district court’s order 

denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We 

have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district 

court. Morrison v. Pennell, No. 5:08-cv-00127-GCM (W.D.N.C. 

Nov. 3, 2008). 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
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAY-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAY-31-1998
<CASH>                                               25308
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                         2435
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     27743
<PP&E>                                              112234
<DEPRECIATION>                                        3661
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      137369
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                  206
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             59974
<OTHER-SE>                                           77189
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        137369
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                         0
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                            0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    (29483)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     (29483)
<INCOME-TAX>                                           100
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 (28303)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                        (28303)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (.004)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (.004)
        


</TABLE>
* Witnesses listed alphabetically. Actual order of witnesses to be determined based on topics of 

planned testimony.

Confirmed Witnesses for the

Public Hearing on Proposed Amendments to the 

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 

Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Civil Rules *

Via Videoconference

January 22, 2021 – 1:00 P.M.(ET)

1. Stacy Braverman Cloyd, National Organization of Social Security Claimants’ 

Representatives 

2. Joanna Suyes, Marks & Harrison
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.                  

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [FEMA-3156-EM] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of an emergency for the State of New Jersey (FEMA-3156-EM), dated November 1, 2000, and related determinations. 

# EFFECTIVE DATE:

December 27, 2000.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Madge Dale, Response and Recovery Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3772. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Notice is hereby given that the incident period for this emergency is amended to May 30, 2000 through November 1, 2000. Further, FEMA intends to provide emergency protective measures (Category B), at 75 percent Federal funding for eligible costs incurred by the State government. 

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 83.537, Community Disaster Loans; 83.538, Cora Brown Fund Program; 83.539, Crisis Counseling; 83.540, Disaster Legal Services Program; 83.541, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 83.542, Fire Suppression Assistance; 83.543, Individual and Family Grant (IFG) Program; 83.544, Public Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing Program; 83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.) 

James L. Witt, 

Director. 

[FR Doc. 01-1033 Filed 1-11-01; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6718-02-P