alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Federal Register: December 4, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 233)]
[Notices]
[page 75677]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr04de00-49]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

TIME AND DATE: 11:00 a.m., Friday, December 29, 2000.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., N.W., Washington, D.C., 9th Floor Conference
Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5100.

Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 00-30859 Filed 11-30-00; 10:46 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```

----

**======== RETURN TO INDEX      ========**

----
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 964 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 964

 To amend the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 to exempt any 
solar energy project on lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management 
          from an environmental impact statement requirement.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 10, 2009

  Mr. Rohrabacher (for himself, Mr. Jones, Mr. Franks of Arizona, Ms. 
Foxx, Mr. Radanovich, Mr. Young of Alaska, Mr. Gallegly, Mr. Latta, Mr. 
Gary G. Miller of California, Mr. Campbell, Mr. Burton of Indiana, Mr. 
Goodlatte, Mrs. Myrick, and Mr. Bilbray) introduced the following bill; 
        which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 to exempt any 
solar energy project on lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management 
          from an environmental impact statement requirement.

    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 ``Emergency Solar Power Permit Act''.

SEC. 2. EXEMPTION OF SOLAR ENERGY PROJECTS FROM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT 
              STATEMENT REQUIREMENT.

    (a) In General.--Title I of the National Environmental Policy Act 
of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4331 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 
following new section:
    ``Sec. 106.  No action relating to the development, deployment, or 
operation of a solar energy project on lands managed by the Bureau of 
Land Management shall be considered a major Federal action for the 
purposes of section 102(2)(C).''.
    (b) Effect for Statements Underway.--Each department and agency of 
the Federal Government shall cease the preparation of a statement, 
commenced pursuant to section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)), for any action described in 
the amendment made by subsection (a), to the extent that the 
preparation of such statement would delay or otherwise interfere with 
such action.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 10.32

                             Secured Promissory Note

$20,000                                                          January 4, 1999

      FOR VALUE RECEIVED, Robert H. Davis ("Maker"), promises to pay to the
order GreenMan Technologies, Inc.(the "Payee" or "the holder of this Note"), or
registered assigns, the principal amount of Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000),
in such coin or currency of the United States of America, as shall be legal
tender for the payment of public or private debts, together with interest at a
rate equal to 8.5% per annum.

1. Payment

      The principal balance and all accrued but unpaid interest shall be due and
payable on January 4, 2002.

2. Prepayment

      This Note may be prepaid, without premium or penalty, in whole or in part,
at any time or from time to time at the option of the Maker, by paying to the
Payee an amount equal to then outstanding principal balance together with
interest accrued thereon through the date of prepayment.

3. Security

      The Maker's obligations hereunder shall be secured by 69,686 shares of
GreenMan Technologies, Inc. common stock owned by the Maker which shall be
pledged to the Payee as collateral until such time as this Note is extinguished.

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Note has been executed and delivered on the date
specified above by Robert H. Davis.

                                            By: /s/ Robert H. Davis
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-6224

TIMOTHY WIMS, a/k/a Timothy Derrinado Davis, a/k/a John Darren Delgado,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

WARDEN, FCI Edgefield,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock 

Hill. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. (0:16-cv-02302-RBH)

Submitted: August 29, 2017 Decided: September 15, 2017

Before AGEE, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Timothy Wims, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Timothy Wims, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order accepting the 

recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) 

petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although 

we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm. See Beckles v. United States, 137 

S. Ct. 886, 894-95 (2017) (United States Sentencing Guidelines not subject to void for 

vagueness challenge and therefore Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), did 

not invalidate the residual clause of the definition of a crime of violence under the 

Guidelines). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
```

[Federal Register: August 14, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 157)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 48549]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr14au03-6]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

17 CFR Part 18


Reports by Traders

CFR Correction

    In Title 17 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 1 to 199,
revised as of January 1, 2003, in Sec.  18.04, on page 314, remove
paragraph (d).

[FR Doc. 03-55522 Filed 8-13-03; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
```
Exhibit 21

           Principal Subsidiaries of Global Payment Technologies, Inc.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                Jurisdiction                  Percentage Ownership
                  Name of Subsidiary                            Incorporation                  by the Registrant
--------------------------------------------------------        -------------                ----------------------
<S>                                                             <C>                                  <C>
Global Payment Technology Holdings (Proprietary) Limited        South Africa                           5%

International Payment Systems Pty Ltd.                          South Africa                          30%


Global Payment Technologies Australia Pty. Ltd.                   Australia                           50%

Global Payment Technologies (Europe) Limited                    United Kingdom                        70%

CBV China Venture Limited                                         Delaware                            50%
  - Hangzhou CBV Plastics Corp. Ltd.                                China                            100%

Abacus Financial Management Systems Limited                     United Kingdom                        25%

Abacus Financial Management Systems Ltd., USA                    United States                        80%
</TABLE>
IV 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1347 

Honoring the workers who perished on the Deepwater Horizon offshore oil 

platform in the Gulf of Mexico off the coast of Louisiana, extending 

condolences to their families, and recognizing the valiant efforts of emergency response workers at the disaster site. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 11, 2010 

Mr. MELANCON submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

RESOLUTION 

Honoring the workers who perished on the Deepwater Horizon offshore oil platform in the Gulf of Mexico off the 

coast of Louisiana, extending condolences to their families, and recognizing the valiant efforts of emergency 

response workers at the disaster site. 

Whereas 11 workers tragically died on the Deepwater Horizon offshore oil platform following an explosion on April 

20, 2010; 

Whereas the Nation is greatly indebted to offshore workers 

for the strenuous work they perform to provide the energy that drives our Nation every day; 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 1347 IH 

Whereas the Nation has long recognized the importance of 

safety protections for offshore workers who labor in difficult and uncertain conditions; 

Whereas these men were loving husbands, sons and brothers; 

Whereas these workers should be remembered for their valor 

and contribution to our communities; 

Whereas Coast Guard and local rescue crews worked tirelessly night and day in courageous rescue and recovery 

missions; 

Whereas the families of the lost workers have endured a 

great loss; and 

Whereas residents of the Gulf Coast and the Nation came together to support these families: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) recognizes the untimely and tragic loss of 

3 the 11 workers from the States of Louisiana, Mis4 sissippi, and Texas who died on the Deepwater Hori5 zon offshore oil platform in the Gulf of Mexico off 

6 the coast of Louisiana; 

7 (2) extends the deepest condolences of the Na8 tion to the families of these men; 

9 (3) recognizes all employees on the Deepwater 

10 Horizon for their hard work and sacrifice; 

11 (4) commends the rescue crews for their valiant 

12 efforts to rescue these workers and others on the 

13 platform; and 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 1347 IH 

1 (5) honors the many volunteers who provided 

2 support and comfort for the families of these people 

3 during this difficult time. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32




Certifications of




Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer




Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,




As Adopted Pursuant to




Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002




In connection with the Annual Report of Micrel, Incorporated (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Raymond D. Zinn, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:




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




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




Date: February 28, 2011

/S/ Raymond D. Zinn

Raymond D. Zinn

President, Chief Executive Officer and Director

(Principal Executive Officer)












In connection with the Annual Report of Micrel, Incorporated (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Clyde R. Wallin, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:




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




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









Date: February 28, 2011

/S/ Clyde R. Wallin

Clyde R. Wallin

Vice President, Finance and Human Resources and Chief Financial Officer

(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
#### Becky Drywall Corp., Respondent, v Hudson Meridian Construction Group, LLC, Appellant.

[874 NYS2d 372]

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Helen E. Freedman, J.), entered July 14, 2008, which denied defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of defendant dismissing the complaint.

The explicit language of the contract between the parties precludes any recovery by plaintiff. Concur — Friedman, J.P., Nardelli, Catterson and DeGrasse, JJ.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

December 26, 2012

t1217

Order 

December 26, 2012

145608

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 145608

COA: 310030 

Jackson CC: 11-004915-FH

BARRY GLENN RITTER,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 19, 2012 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
#### Gayle R. Huerter, Respondent, v Astoria Federal Savings Bank, Defendant, and Bruce S. Reznick et al., Appellants.

[875 NYS2d 215]-

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for negligence and conversion, the defendants Bruce S. Reznick and Peter Piccirillo appeal, as limited, by their brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Blydenburgh, J), entered April 12, 2007, as, upon an order of the same court dated July 25, 2006, granting that branch of the plaintiffs motion which was for summary judgment on the first and second causes of action insofar as asserted against them, and upon an order of the same court dated September 28, 2006, granting that branch of the plaintiffs motion which was for the imposition of a sanction against the defendant Bruce S. Reznick, is in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the principal sum of $22,559.71, and is in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant Bruce S. Reznick in the principal sum of $9,725.

Ordered that the appeal by the defendant Peter Piccirillo from so much of the judgment as is in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant Bruce S. Reznick in the principal sum of $9,725 is dismissed, as he is not aggrieved by that portion of the judgment *(see*CPLR 5511); and it is further,

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the plaintiff.

The Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the *816plaintiffs motion which was for summary judgment on the first and second causes of action, seeking the return of funds wrongfully removed from her bank account, insofar as asserted against the appellants. We reject the appellants’ contention that under the mistake of fact doctrine, they should be permitted to retain the funds wrongfully seized *(see Banque Worms v BankAmerica Intl.,*77 NY2d 362, 366 [1991]; *Bank of New York v Spiro,*267 AD2d 339 [1999]). The mistake of fact doctrine is not applicable because the plaintiff made no mistake. Rather, the funds were wrongfully seized from her account.

We also reject the appellants’ contention that the Supreme Court exhibited bias towards them. The court’s decision was based on the merits of the parties’ arguments rather than on any alleged bias *(see generally Pourooshasb v Pourooshasb,*4 AD3d 404 [2004]).

Finally, under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court’s imposition of a sanction was a provident exercise of its discretion *(see*22 NYCRR 130-1.1 [a], [c], [d]). Skelos, J.P., Fisher, Balkin and Belen, JJ., concur.
```

[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 112 (Monday, June 11, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 31211]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-14646]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-201-828]

Welded Large Diameter Line Pipe From Mexico: Postponement of 
Preliminary Determination of Antidumping Duty Investigation

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

ACTION: Notice of postponement of preliminary determination of 
antidumping duty investigation.

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

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 25, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Johnson at (202) 482-3818; Import 
Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 
20230.

Statutory Time Limits

    Section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 
Act), requires the Department of Commerce (the Department) to issue the 
preliminary determination of an antidumping duty investigation within 
140 days after the date of initiation. However, if the case is 
extraordinarily complicated and additional time is necessary to make 
the preliminary determination, and the parties concerned are 
cooperating in the investigation, section 733(c)(1)(B) of the Act 
allows the Department to extend the time limit for the preliminary 
determination until not later than 190 days after the date of 
initiation.

Background

    On January 30, 2001, the Department initiated the above-referenced 
investigation. See Notice of Initiation of Antidumping Duty 
Investigations: Welded Large Diameter Line Pipe from Mexico and Japan, 
66 FR 11266 (February 23, 2001). The preliminary determinations are 
currently due no later than June 19, 2001.

Extension of Preliminary Determination

    The Department has now concluded, consistent with section 
733(c)(1)(B) of the Act, that this investigation is extraordinarily 
complicated, and that additional time is necessary to issue the 
preliminary determination due to the complexity of certain issues 
raised in these cases, including the complexity of the transactions to 
be investigated and adjustments to be considered and the novelty of the 
issues presented. Specifically, the Department must investigate 
complicated matters of affiliation between the respondent and another 
producer. Simultaneously, it must analyze and respond to petitioners' 
recent allegation of sales-below-cost.
    Therefore, in light of the fact that the parties to this proceeding 
have been cooperating, pursuant to section 733(c)(1) of the Act, and 
that additional time is necessary to make this preliminary 
determination in accordance with section 733(c)(1)(B)(ii) of the Act, 
the Department is postponing the deadline for issuing this 
determination until August 8, 2001.

    Dated: June 4, 2001.
Faryar Shirzad,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 01-14646 Filed 6-8-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
```
|Fidelity (logo) Investments®| | 245 Summer Street
Boston MA  02210
617 563 7000
|----------------------------- | -----------------------------------------------

|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| | August 1, 2014
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------

U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission

100 F Street, N.E.

Washington, D.C. 20549

|Re: | Fidelity Investment Trust (the trust):                                                   
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|    | Fidelity Emerging Markets Discovery Fund
Fidelity Total Emerging Markets Fund (the funds)
|    | File Nos. 002-90649 and 811-04008                                                        

__________________________________________________________________________

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Transmitted herewith for filing pursuant to Rule 497(e) under the Securities Act of 1933 (33 Act), as
amended, are exhibits containing interactive data format risk/return summary information for supplements to
the registration statement for the funds listed above. The purpose of this filing is to submit the 497 filing in
XBRL for the funds.

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| | Very truly yours,  
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------
|                                                                                                                           |                    
|                                                                                                                           | /s/Jamie Plourde   
|                                                                                                                           | Jamie Plourde      
|                                                                                                                           | Legal Product Group