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

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health 

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Nursing Research Special Emphasis Panel Research Scientist Development Award for Minority Investigators Applications.                    

*Date:*                         March 1, 2005.                    

*Time:*                         3 p.m. to 7 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Bethesda Marriott Suites, 6711 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20817.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Jeffrey M. Chernak, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Office of Review, National Institute of Nursing Research, 6701 Democracy Plaza, Suite 712, MSC 4870, Bethesda, MD 20817, (301) 402-6959,                         *chernak@nih.gov.*

This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.361, Nursing Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: February 2, 2005.

LaVerne Y. Stringfield,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 05-2348 Filed 2-7-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
Case 7:07-cv-03511-CLB-MDF Document 6-2 Filed 07/16/2007 Page 1 of 1
Second Amendment to Purchase Agreement



 Exhibit 10.42 
 SECOND AMENDMENT TO PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT 
 THIS SECOND AMENDMENT TO PURCHASE AND
SALE AGREEMENT (this “Second Amendment”) is made as of the 14th day of August, 2009, by and between COGNAC WILLOW OAKS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Seller”) and KBS CAPITAL ADVISORS LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company (“Buyer”). In consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, the parties hereto agree as follows: 
 RECITALS 
 A. Seller and Buyer are parties to that certain Purchase and Sale Agreement dated
as of August 5, 2009, as amended by that certain First Amendment to Purchase and Sale Agreement dated as of August 12, 2009 (as amended, the “Purchase Agreement”). All initially-capitalized terms not otherwise defined
herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Purchase Agreement unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. 
 B. Seller and Buyer
have agreed to modify the terms of the Purchase Agreement as set forth in this Second Amendment. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, for valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, and intended to be legally bound, Seller and Buyer agree as follows: 
 1. Recitals. The Recitals set forth above are hereby incorporated herein by reference as if the same were fully set forth herein. 
 2. Due Diligence Period. The last day of the Due Diligence Period shall be, and hereby is, extended from
August 14, 2009, at 5:00 p.m. to August 18, 2009, at 5:00 p.m. (Eastern time). 
 3. Effectiveness of
Agreement. Except as modified by this Second Amendment, all the terms of the Purchase Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect. 
 4. Counterparts. This Second Amendment may be executed in counterparts, and all counterparts together shall be
construed as one document. 
 5. Telecopied or Emailed Signatures. A counterpart of this Second Amendment
that is signed by one party to this Second Amendment and telecopied or emailed to the other party to this Second Amendment or its counsel (i) shall have the same effect as an original signed counterpart of this Second Amendment, and
(ii) shall be conclusive proof, admissible in judicial proceedings, of such party’s execution of this Second Amendment. 
 6. Successors and Assigns. All of the terms and conditions of this Second Amendment shall apply to benefit and bind the successors and assigns of the respective parties. 







 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Seller and Buyer have entered into this Second Amendment to Purchase and Sale
Agreement as of the date first above stated. 
 [SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE] 








							
	“SELLER”
	
	COGNAC WILLOW OAKS, LLC, 
	a Delaware limited liability company
		
	By: 	 	 THE PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA,
 a New Jersey corporation, as the sole member thereof

			
		 	By: 	 	/s/ Collete English Dixon
		 		 	Name: Collete English Dixon
		 		 	Title: Vice President

  

 S-1 









			
	“BUYER”
	
	 KBS CAPITAL ADVISORS LLC,
 a Delaware limited
liability company

		
	By:	 	/s/ Charles J. Schreiber, Jr.
		 	Charles J. Schreiber, Jr.,
		 	Chief Executive Officer

  

 S-2
#### DAVIS H. BOWEN v. AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY.

(Filed 1 November, 1961.)

Insurance § 29—

The evidence, considered in the light most favorable to plaintiff, *is held,*sufficient to support the jury’s findings that plaintiff’s tobacco was damaged to the extent of five per cent or more by hail alone within the provisions of the policy of hail insurance sued on.

Appeal by defendant from *Hall, J.,*March Civil Term, 1961, of Vakce.

Civil action to recover on CHIAA Standard Crop-Hail Policy, issued by defendant to plaintiff, on account of damage to plaintiff’s tobacco crop allegedly caused by wind and hail. The court submitted, and the jury answered, these issues: “1. Was the tobacco crop in question directly damaged by hail alone on July 10, 1959, in an amount of at least five per cent? Answer: Yes. 2. If so, in what percentage was the tobacco crop in question directly damaged by hail and wind simultaneously accompanied by hail? Answer: 30%. 3. What amount, if any, is the plaintiff entitled to recover of the defendant? Answer: $1,170.00.”

*578From judgment for plaintiff, in accordance with the verdict, defendant appealed.

*Perry & Kittrell for plaintiff, appellee.*

*Joyner, Howison & Mitchell for defendant, appellant.*

Pee Cueiam.

There was ample evidence that, during the late afternoon of July 10, 1959, there was a storm, consisting of a hard wind, hail and rain, in the vicinity of plaintiff’s 6.44-acre tobacco field; and that, as a result of said storm, plaintiff’s tobacco was severely damaged.

The critical issue with reference to defendant’s liability to plaintiff under the policy, was whether plaintiff’s tobacco was damaged *by hail*and, if so, whether plaintiff’s tobacco was damaged “to the extent of 5% or more by hail only.” As to this, the evidence offered by plaintiff and defendant was in sharp conflict. Defendant’s evidence tended to show the damage to plaintiff's tobacco was caused solely by wind. However, when considered in the light most favorable to plaintiff, we think the evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s finding (on the first issue) in plaintiff’s favor.

Consideration of each of defendant’s assignments of error discloses that error, if any, in the conduct of the trial, was not sufficiently prejudicial to defendant to justify the award of a new trial. Hence, the verdict and judgment will not be disturbed.

No error.
Case 1:07-cv-03429-DCF Document 11 Filed 08/31/2007 Page 1 of 1
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

November 21, 2011 

t1114 

Order 

 

November 21, 2011 

143053 

PRESIDENT INN PROPERTIES, L.L.C., 

Petitioner-Appellant, 

v SC: 143053 

 COA: 294452 

MTT: 00-310739 

CITY OF GRAND RAPIDS, 

Respondent-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 17, 2011 

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

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2134 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2134

 To extend the transfer of Electronic Travel Authorization System fees 
from the Travel Promotion Fund to the Corporation for Travel Promotion 
                 (Brand USA) through fiscal year 2027.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 16, 2019

  Mr. Blunt (for himself, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Gardner, and Ms. Cortez 
Masto) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 
       to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To extend the transfer of Electronic Travel Authorization System fees 
from the Travel Promotion Fund to the Corporation for Travel Promotion 
                 (Brand USA) through fiscal year 2027.

    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 ``Brand USA Extension Act''.

SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF FUNDING FOR BRAND USA.

    Subsection (d) of the Travel Promotion Act of 2009 (22 U.S.C. 
2131(d)) is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (2)(B), by striking ``2020'' and inserting 
        ``2027''; and
            (2) in paragraph (4)(B), by striking ``2020'' and inserting 
        ``2027''.
                                 <all>
```
Case 1:07-cv-03477-LAK Document 27-4 Filed 09/12/2008 Page 1 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-03477-LAK Document 27-4 Filed 09/12/2008 Page 2 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-03477-LAK Document 27-4 Filed 09/12/2008 Page 3 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-03477-LAK Document 27-4 Filed 09/12/2008 Page 4 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-03477-LAK Document 27-4 Filed 09/12/2008 Page 5 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-03477-LAK Document 27-4 Filed 09/12/2008 Page 6 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-03477-LAK Document 27-4 Filed 09/12/2008 Page 7 of 7
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32.2


          CERTIFICATION 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 amended Annual Report of One Voice Technologies, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Rahoul Sharan, 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:

          (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.

A signed original of this written statement required by section 9.06 has been
provided to One Voice and will be retained by One Voice and furnished to the
Securities Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



Dated: April 1, 2005

                                                 /s/ Rahoul Sharan
                                                 -----------------
                                                 Name: Rahoul Sharan
                                                 Title: Chief Financial Officer
                                                        and Director
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

HANNA KLEINPETER-FLECK, individually and on

behalf of all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

vs.

COLLINS & AIKMAN CORPORATION, DAVID A.

STOCKMAN, J. MICHAEL STEPP and

BRYCE M. KOTH,

Defendants

Case No. 1:05-cv-03791-MGC

K. J. EGLESTON, individually and on behalf of all

others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

vs.

JERRY L. MOSINGO, DAVID A.

STOCKMAN, J. MICHAEL STEPP and

BRYCE KOTH,

Defendants

Case No. 1:05-cv-04950-JGK

MORRIS AKERMAN, individually and on behalf of

all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

vs.

COLLINS AND AIKMAN CORPORATION, DAVID

STOCKMAN, J. MICHAEL STEPP and

BRYCE KOTH,

Defendants

Case No. 1:05-cv- 05098-UA

DECLARATION OF GUSTAVO BRUCKNER IN SUPPORT

OF MOTION OF K. J. EGLESTON

FOR CONSOLIDATION, APPOINTMENT AS LEAD PLAINTIFF

AND APPROVAL OF SELECTION OF LEAD COUNSEL

Case 1:05-cv-04950-MBM Document 4 Filed 06/06/2005 Page 1 of 2
I, Gustavo Bruckner, hereby declare:

1. I am an associate of the law firm of Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz

LLP. I submit this Declaration in support of K. J. Egleston’s motion for consolidation,

appointment as lead plaintiff and approval of his selection of Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman &

Herz LLP as Lead Counsel.

2. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of the notice of pendency

published on PRNewswire on April 5, 2005.

3. Attached hereto as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of the plaintiff certification

executed by K.J. Egleston which demonstrates his class standing and requisite financial interest

in the outcome of the litigation.

4. Attached hereto as Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of a loss chart detailing

K.J. Egleston’s transactions in Collins & Aikman Corporation securities during the relevant

Class Period and their approximate losses.

5. Attached hereto as Exhibit D is a true and correct copy of the firm biography of

Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP.

6. Attached hereto as Exhibit E is a true and correct copy of the firm biography of

Gainey & McKenna.

Signed under penalty of perjury this 6th day of June, 2005.

______/s/_______________________________

Gustavo Bruckner, Esq

404335

Case 1:05-cv-04950-MBM Document 4 Filed 06/06/2005 Page 2 of 2
# C_2011026EN.01003001.xml

| 28.1.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 26/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.1.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 26/30

---

Commission communication pursuant to Article 16 of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community

Public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services

(Text with EEA relevance)

2011/C 26/14

| Member State | Sweden |
| --- | --- |
| Concerned routes | — | Arvidsjaur–Stockholm/Arlanda |

Member State

Sweden

Concerned routes

—

Arvidsjaur–Stockholm/Arlanda

| — | Gällivare–Stockholm/Arlanda |
| --- | --- |

—

Gällivare–Stockholm/Arlanda

| — | Hagfors–Stockholm/Arlanda |
| --- | --- |

—

Hagfors–Stockholm/Arlanda

| — | Hemavan–Stockholm/Arlanda |
| --- | --- |

—

Hemavan–Stockholm/Arlanda

| — | Lycksele–Stockholm/Arlanda |
| --- | --- |

—

Lycksele–Stockholm/Arlanda

| — | Pajala–Luleå |
| --- | --- |

—

Pajala–Luleå

| — | Sveg–Stockholm/Arlanda |
| --- | --- |

—

Sveg–Stockholm/Arlanda

| — | Torsby–Stockholm/Arlanda |
| --- | --- |

—

Torsby–Stockholm/Arlanda

| — | Vilhelmina–Stockholm/Arlanda |
| --- | --- |

—

Vilhelmina–Stockholm/Arlanda

| — | Östersund–Umeå |
| --- | --- |

—

Östersund–Umeå

Date of entry into force of the revised public service obligations

30 October 2011

Address where the text and any relevant information and/or documentation related to the public service obligations can be obtained free of charge

| The Swedish Transport Administration |
| --- |
| SE-781 87 Borlänge |
| SVERIGE |
| Tel. +46 771921921 |
| Fax +46 771921921 |
| Contact person: Anna Fürst |
| E-mail: anna.furst@trafikverket.se |

The Swedish Transport Administration

SE-781 87 Borlänge

SVERIGE

Tel. +46 771921921

Fax +46 771921921

Contact person: Anna Fürst

E-mail: anna.furst@trafikverket.se

---
Exhibit 4.2


 


 


 


Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm


We have issued our
report dated March 25, 2020, with respect to the financial statement of Advisors Disciplined Trust 1996 contained in Amendment
No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-6 (File No. 333-235797) and related Prospectus. We consent to the use of the aforementioned
report in the Registration Statement and Prospectus, and to the use of our name as it appears under the caption “Experts”.


 


/s/ Grant
Thornton LLP


 


Chicago, Illinois


March 25, 2020
Order entered February 12, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05
- 12
- 01048
- CV LESLIE VOLLMER, Appellant
V. LINDA VOLLMER, Appellee On Appeal from the 330th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cau se No. DF
- 11
- 17494
- Y 

### O RDER By postcard dated November 1, 2013, we notified the official court reporter for the 330th Judicial District Court that the reporter’s record was overdue. We directed the court reporter to file the record within thirty days. T o date, we have not received any response. This appeal cannot proceed until the issue of the reporter’s record is resolved. Accordingly, we ORDER court reporter Francheska Duffey to file, within FIFTEEN DAYS of the date of this order, either (1) the repor ter’s record; (2) written verification that no hearings were recorded; or (3) written verification that appellant has not requested the record.

/s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE
Case 1:07-cr-00257-SAS Document 5 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 1 of 1
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-27 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 1 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-27 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 2 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-27 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 3 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-27 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 4 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-27 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 5 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-27 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 6 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-27 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 7 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-27 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 8 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-27 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 9 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-27 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 10 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-27 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 11 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-27 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 12 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-27 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 13 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-27 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 14 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-27 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 15 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-27 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 16 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-27 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 17 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-27 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 18 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-27 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 19 of 20
Case 1:07-cv-03580-DLC Document 23-27 Filed 06/12/2007 Page 20 of 20
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-7080

DREW C. HARTLEY,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA; SHERIFF OF ONSLOW COUNTY,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at 

Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:23-hc-02113-D)

Submitted: February 22, 2024 Decided: February 27, 2024

Before NIEMEYER and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Drew C. Hartley, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-7080 Doc: 14 Filed: 02/27/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Drew C. Hartley, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying 

relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition and denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion for 

reconsideration. The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a 

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A). A certificate of appealability will 

not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(2). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this 

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists could find the district court’s assessment 

of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong. See Buck v. Davis, 580 U.S. 100, 115-17 

(2017). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must 

demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable and that the petition 

states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 

134, 140-41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)). 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Hartley has not made 

the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the 

appeal. We also deny all of Hartley’s pending motions. 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. 

DISMISSED

USCA4 Appeal: 23-7080 Doc: 14 Filed: 02/27/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-03479-AKH Document 13 Filed 03/17/2008 Page 1 of 2Case 1:07-cv-03479-AKH Document 13 Filed 03/17/2008 Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit32.1**

**FORM 10-Q**

**Section 1350Certifications**

**Quarterended June 30, 2006**

I, Herbert Lindo,Chairman, President and Principal Financial Officer of Kenilworth SystemsCorporation (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of myknowledge:

(1)             theQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the second quarter endedJune 30, 2006 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934(15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

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

Dated:  September 8, 2006
|        |   | /s/ Herbert Lindo                                              |   |
|--------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   | Herbert Lindo                                                  |
|   |   | Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and Chief  Financial Officer |

 

----