alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
OFFICE OF THE AYTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Bonamb10 aonIon C,caar 

oeunty Irtterney ) 

laoEqaoaa 4ountf 

&aupasar, roxaa 

uo me your 1ett 

for a logal opiaion the t 

pal. roar hir ddilbeaa%ziuM&greel$ 

l#nth, in addition to 

1 board hare the authoroipal of their Mb001 

supt. of a pofeot aa8 

$100.00 perlTtonth,in 

8 regular salyr 

IL 2.s tail0 opinion oi this tlopartlmnt thbt your inQtey should be anmfersd an UN arthlatl?o. 
non. I t

1y pub110 nnan%Ci~l nnan%Ci~l COqORdOns, COqORdOns, a mOI'O OpQCii'icallj OpQCii'icallj 

u n the authority authority of OSMdams &bn v*e Tulles, Tulles, 300 So 1. Ml, affGw3dike 41 13. 1. (2) 21, whorein wherein It is aaictt. aaictt. 

'In artid 2227, it is proVid@d, in 

effort, that vetsto cud oounty available* 

school 'f'uds shall be used esoluelrely 

for the paymnt oC teoohero' arul superlnteudonts* salaries, ret6 for takbg 

the scholastic oen3ua, and inttwest on 

money borrwti' for those ymrposes. that 

loco1 ScbOOl funIt derive5 from WLtrict 

taxes' and all other local sources may be 

us&. for the ubove onusmated yuqoses, 

uml 'for -hasing applianoes arc supplies, for the piaymnt of irmwunce prom.iu133, janitors and ether ezaployees, for 

buying school sites, buying, building erdl 

r~p0lrd.n;; and raxtlug school houses, an3 

for other ~rposss necessary iu th" conduct of the public schools to be dctwI&IO& by the board of trustsos, the occounts unl vouchers for county distrl.cfs 

to bo appr0vOa by tbc oounty suyerlntendents provided, that 'Jhzn the state available school fund in any city or district 

ir; sufficiant to r;ajxitu.ln tho schools 

thereof In any year for ft 1eLooot eight 

months, ani; leave a sur~*zus, such surplus my be erponGed for the purposes 

wntionti herein.' 

'ThB Wfact or those statutwy protlsions is to authorizethe trustees to 

expend W.m school Sun-33 dorivod from local sources, un?! tho surplus from the 

state and county available school fun&s, 

for any and all ths pu.rposoa enmerated, 

ani for such other purposas as 3.n the cliscxeticn of the board of trustees nay be 

roasonabl~ necessary in the zaintenance 

snd ojxsratlon of the schools.* 

In @lng this opinion TB have taken into oonsideration your further advice that the iluties of the 

*sponsor SuporhtaTld~nt~ pert&n to bookkeeping, supervising purchases, koop%ng records, hiring labor, and the 

like, and that the services are to be perf+orrneil from 
Uoa. Go&On G. Co88 -- Page 3 

menn until niw O*alock in the morrdng, and &~IJI four 

ant11 sir o@clOck in the afternoon, 8s well aa on 

Saarly pad on other who01 holidays. Ia other 

ho renioe~ ot the Sponsor SUperlnfondent 

mill h DO wlsa Interfere with the servloes o? a 

lioeneed engineer, who is to have dlreot supervisIon 

of rtructuml work in complianeo rith our statuter 

govemIng such matters. 

Trusting thattble ~Illhave ansreredyour 

inquiry satisfactorily, we are 

Very truly yours 

ATTORNZY GiZK?W& OF TDI 

Ocii &or 

AasL3tunt
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 19-0518

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

MATTHEW GLEN HOTCHKISS,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including April 29, 2020, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

March 19 2020

03/19/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0518
#### UTILITIES COMM. v. TOWN OF PINEVILLE

No. 61 PC.

Case below: 17 N.C. App. 522.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 30 April 1973.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

ASHLEY REGINA MOWERY,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 333 MAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 16th day of November, 2020, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADDED BY

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of OptimumBank Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Albert J. Finch, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, as added by § 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.

To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for the period covered by the Report.





|                         |  |     |                                         
|------------------------ |  | --- | ----------------------------------------
|Date:  November 10, 2006 |  | By: | /s/ ALBERTJ. FINCH                      
|                         |  |     | Albert J. Finch, Chief Executive Officer
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5206 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to increase the maximum age for 

children eligible for medical care under the CHAMPVA program. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 4, 2010 

Mr. TEAGUE (for himself and Mr. HEINRICH) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to increase the 

maximum age for children eligible for medical care under 

the CHAMPVA program. 

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

3 SECTION 1. INCREASE OF MAXIMUM AGE FOR CHILDREN 

4 ELIGIBLE FOR MEDICAL CARE UNDER 

5 CHAMPVA PROGRAM. 

6 (a) INCREASE.—Section 1781(c) of title 38, United 

7 States Code, is amended— 

8 (1) by striking ‘‘twenty-three’’ and inserting 

9 ‘‘twenty-six’’; and 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5206 IH

1 (2) by striking ‘‘twenty-third birthday’’ and in2 serting ‘‘twenty-sixth birthday’’. 

3 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

4 subsection (a) shall apply with respect to medical care pro5 vided on or after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5603 

To amend the Older Americans Act of 1965 to make available to Guam, 

American Samoa, the Virgin Islands of the United States, and the 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands additional funds for 

community service senior opportunities. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 24, 2010 

Mr. SABLAN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Education and Labor 

A BILL 

To amend the Older Americans Act of 1965 to make available to Guam, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands of 

the United States, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands additional funds for community 

service senior opportunities. 

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

3 SECTION 1. AMENDMENTS. 

4 Section 506(a)(2) of the Older Americans Act of 

5 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3056d(a)(2)) is amended— 

6 (1) by striking ‘‘0.75 percent’’ and inserting 

7 ‘‘1.0 percent’’, 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5603 IH

1 (2) in subparagraph (A) by striking ‘‘30 per2 cent’’ and inserting ‘‘25 percent’’, and 

3 (3) in subparagraph (B) by striking ‘‘10 per4 cent’’ and inserting ‘‘25 percent’’. 

5 SEC. 2. APPLICATION OF AMENDMENTS. 

6 The amendments made by this Act shall not apply 

7 with respect to funds appropriated before the date of the 

8 enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
# EUR-Lex - 32007M4530 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 32007M4530

**Commission Decision of 19/02/2007 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the common market (Case No IV/M.4530 - 3i GROUP / AZELIS) according to Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 (Only the English text is authentic) **

*

*

Brussels, 19.02.2007

SG-Greffe(2007) D/200738

To the notifying party

Dear Madam(s) and/or Sir(s),

Subject: Case No. COMP/M.4530 – 3i Group/Azelis

Notification of 22.01.2007 pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004 [1]

Publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities No. C 019, 27.01.2007, page 16.

1. On 22 January 2007, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 by which the undertaking 3i Group plc ("3i Group", UK) acting indirectly through 3i Funds acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1) (b) of the Council Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking Azelis S.A. ("Azelis", LUX) by way of purchase of shares.

2. The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

- for undertaking 3i Group: private equity and venture capital company

- for undertaking Azelis: specialty chemicals distribution

3. After examination of the notification, the Commission has concluded that the notified operation falls within the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004 and of paragraph 5, subparagraph c, of the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [2].

4. For the reasons set out in the Notice on a simplified procedure, the Commission has decided not to oppose the notified operation and to declare it compatible with the common market and with the EEA Agreement. This decision is adopted in application of Article 6(1) (b) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004.

For the Commission,

signed,

Philip LOWE

Director General

[1] OJ L 24, 29.1.2004 p. 1.

[2] OJ C 56, 05.3.2005 p.32.

--------------------------------------------------
#### STATE v. C. E. KIZIAH.

(Filed 15 December, 1965.)

Appeal by defendant from *McLaughlin, J.,*May 24, 1965 Criminal Session (High Point Division) GuileoRd Superior Court.

The defendant was charged in a warrant issued by the High Point Municipal Court with issuing and delivering to Bernard M. Gutterman, T/A Thaden Moulding Corporation, a check drawn on High Point Savings & Trust Company in the amount of $110.00 for merchandise, knowing at the time that he did not have sufficient funds on deposit nor arrangement with the bank to pay the check upon presentation. From a conviction and judgment in the Municipal Court, the defendant appealed to the Superior Court of *119Guilford County where he entered a plea of not guilty. He was not represented by counsel but cross-examined the State’s witnesses and testified in his own behalf. From a verdict of guilty and judgment thereon, he obtained counsel and appealed.

*T. W. Bruton, Attorney General, Harrison Lewis, Deputy Attorney General, Millard B. Rich, Jr., Trial Attorney for the State.*

*Boyan*<fe *Wilson by Clarence C. Boyan for defendant appellant.*

Pee Cueiam.

The defendant’s only assignment of error is the failure of the court to enter judgment of nonsuit or to direct a verdict of not guilty at the close of the evidence. The State’s witness, Gutterman, testified that defendant purchased furniture, received a bill of lading therefor, and gave a check for $110.00 in payment. The check was returned by the bank on which it was drawn with the notation, “No account.” The defendant testified in his own behalf and, on cross-examination, stated: “I signed that check. I knew at the time I signed it I didn’t have any money in the bank and I told him (the prosecuting witness) so.” He claimed that his partner promised to make a deposit in the bank. This was not done.

The evidence was sufficient to go to the jury and to sustain its verdict of guilty and the judgment thereon.

No error.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 26, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

130965(69) Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

BEVERLY A. MOORE, Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, Plaintiff-Appellant, Justices 

v SC: 130965 

 COA: 262390 
 Wayne CC: 04-416248-CD

LISETTE A. EGAN, BRIAN OBERLY, PATTY 

SCHOECK, YVONNE BROWNLESS, ALICIA

HORVATH, and SISTERS OF BON SECOURS 

NURSING CARE CENTER,

Defendants-Appellees. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s order of July 

31, 2006 is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously. 

p0918 

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. 

September 26, 2006 

 Clerk
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.                  

###### Farm Credit Administration

# AGENCY:

Farm Credit Administration. 

# SUMMARY:

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b(e)(3)), of the regular meeting of the Farm Credit Administration Board (Board). 

# Date and Time:

The regular meeting of the Board will be held at the offices of the Farm Credit Administration in McLean, Virginia, on November 8, 2005, from 9 a.m. until such time as the Board concludes its business. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jeanette C. Brinkley, Secretary to the Farm Credit Administration Board, (703) 883-4009, TTY (703) 883-4056. 

# ADDRESSES:

Farm Credit Administration, 1501 Farm Credit Drive, McLean, Virginia 22102-5090. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This meeting of the Board will be open to the public (limited space available). In order to increase the accessibility to Board meetings, persons requiring assistance should make arrangements in advance. The matters to be considered at the meeting are: 

## Open Session 

### A. Approval of Minutes 

    - October 13, 2005 (Open)

### B. Reports 

    - Office of Management Services Report

### C. New Business—Regulations 

    - FCA Organization—Final Rule

Dated: November 2, 2005. 

Jeanette C. Brinkley, 

Secretary, Farm Credit Administration Board. 

[FR Doc. 05-22122 Filed 11-2-05; 12:50: pm] 

BILLING CODE 6705-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                             390
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      316
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                         47
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,056
<PP&E>                                           5,593
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (2,862)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   4,727
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           18,140
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                         8,702
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            5,997
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                    (36,036)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     4,727
<SALES>                                          7,802
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 7,802
<CGS>                                            3,456
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,456
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,024
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,706
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,309)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,309)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,309)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.23)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

M.M., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

Socorro, TX, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 21-1176

Issued: August 20, 2021

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Alternate Judge

On July 27, 2021 appellant filed an appeal from an April 15, 2020 decision of the Office 

of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of the Appellate Boards assigned 

Docket No. 21-1176.

The Board has duly considered the matter and notes that the Board has jurisdiction to 

review final adverse decisions of OWCP issued under the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act.1 

For final adverse decisions of OWCP issued on or after November 19, 2008, the Board’s review 

authority islimited to appeals which are filed within 180 days from the date of issuance of OWCP’s 

decision.2

The 180th day following the April 15, 2020 decision was Monday, October 12, 2020. As 

appellant did not file an appeal with the Board until July 27, 2021, more than 180 days after the

April 15, 2020 OWCP decision, the Board finds that the appeal docketed as No. 21-1176 is 

untimely filed. The Board is without jurisdiction to review the appeal. Appellant has not offered 

 

1 5 U.S.C. § 8149; 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a) (2009).

2

Id. at § 501.3(e).
2

a reason to explain the failure to timely file an appeal with supporting documentation sufficient to 

establish compelling circumstances.

The Board’s decisions and orders are “final upon the expiration of 30 days from the date 

of their issuance.”

3

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 21-1176 is dismissed.

Issued: August 20, 2021

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

 

3

Id. at § 501.6(d).
---

Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Strategic Internet Investments, Incorporated (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"). I,
Ralph Shearing, Chief Executive Officer of the company, certify, pursuant to 18 USC Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief:

|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 results of operations of the Company.

|Date: | August 22, 2005 | */s/ Ralph Shearing*    
|----- | --------------- | ------------------------
|      |                 | Ralph Shearing, Director

---
## U NITED 

## S TATES 

## N AVY



## – M ARINE 

## C ORPS 

## C OURT OF 

## C RIMINAL 

## A PPEALS

_________________________ No. 201 700126

_________________________ 

### UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Appellee

v.


### JOSEPH A. KERBEIN Quartermaster First Class (E

- 6 ) , U.S. Navy

Appellant

________________________ _ Appeal from the United States Navy

- Marine Corps Trial Judiciary

Military Judge: C ommander A rthur L

. Gaston III , JAGC, USN

. Convening Authority: Command ing Officer
, Afloat Training Group MIDPAC, Pearl Harbor, HI

. Staff Judge Advocate’s Recommendation : Li eutenant Junior Grade

J ared M. Janes , JAGC, USN. For Appellant: Major Jason L. Morris, USMCR

. For Appellee: Brian K. Keller, Esq

.

_________________________ Decided 29 June 2017

_________________________ Before M ARKS , R UGH , and J ONES , Appellate Military J u dges

_________________________ After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of error, we affirm the findings and sentence as approved by the convening authority. Art. 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c).

For the Court

R.H. TROIDL Clerk of Court
EXHIBIT 22.1

                     SUBSIDIARIES OF INTER-TEL, INCORPORATED

         Listed below are all the  subsidiaries of Inter-Tel,  Incorporated,  as
well as the  jurisdiction  under the laws of which each was  organized,  and the
percentage  of  the  outstanding  voting  stock  of  each  owned  by  Inter-Tel,
Incorporated.

                                           Percentage         State or
                                           of Voting        Jurisdiction
Name                                      Stock Owned      of Organization
----                                      -----------      ---------------

Inter-Tel Integrated Systems, Inc.            100%            Arizona

Inter-Tel Communications, Inc.                100%            Arizona

Inter-Tel Leasing, Inc.                       100%            Arizona

Inter-Tel Midwest, Inc.                       100%            Delaware

Inter-Tel Incorporated-New Jersey             100%            Delaware

Inter-Tel NetSolutions, Inc.                  100%            Texas

Inter-Tel DataCom, Inc.                       100%            California

Southwest Telephone Systems, Inc.             100%            New Mexico

American Telcom Corp. of Georgia, Inc.        100%            Georgia

Access West, Inc.                             100%            California

Inter-Tel Equipment (UK), Ltd.                100%            United Kingdom

Inter-Tel Japan, Inc.                         100%            Japan