alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Summary of Loan Agreement
Entered into by and between Shenzhen BAK Battery Co., Ltd. (“the Company”) and
Shenzhen Eastern Branch, Agricultural Bank of China (“the Creditor”) dated June
22, 2009

    


    Main
contents

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              Contract
      number: 81101200900001357;

            


    

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              Loan
      principal:
HKD 5.2363584 million;

            


    

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              Loan
      term: from June 22, 2009 to June 22,
2010;

            


    

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              Interest
      rate: fixed at 0.41286%;

            


    

    
      	
               
      

            	
              n

            	
              Penalty
      interest rate for delayed repayment: 0.41286% plus 30%
      *0.41286%;

            


    

    
      	
               
      

            	
              n

            	
              Penalty
      interest rate for embezzlement of loan proceeds: 0.41286% plus 50%
      *0.41286%;

            


    

    


    
      	
              Ø

            	
              Purpose
      of the loan is to provide import payments of the
  Company;

            


    

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              Advanced
      repayment of loan needs to be approved by the
    Creditor;

            


    

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              Breach
      of contract penalties: correct the breach of contract in time limit;
      suspension of loan unprovided; release loan agreement, demand
      prepayment of loan principal and interest before maturity; imposition
      of punitive interest incurred due to delayed loan; imposition of punitive
      interest for embezzlement of loan; imposition of plural interest for
      unpaid interest; withdraw from any accounts of the Company the loan
      principal, interest and other fees; compensation for the Creditor’s
      expenses incurred due to demanding the loan principal and interest in case
      of litigation, etc.

            


    

    


    Headlines
of the articles omitted:

    Ø       Loan
arrangement

    Ø       Interest
clearing of the loan

    Ø       Payment
of the loan

    Ø       Interest
penalty of loan

    Ø       Rights
and obligation of the Company

    Ø       Rights
and obligations of the Creditor

    Ø       Guarantee
of the loan agreement

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              Disputation
      settlement

            


    

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              Supplemental

            


    

    Ø       Validity

    Ø       Text

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              Notification
DLD

- 077 NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________
No. 18

- 3603

___________
IN RE: ANTHONY FLETCHER
, Petitioner

____________________________________
On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania ( Related to E.D. Pa. Civ. No. 2: 10

- cv

- 03188 )

____________________________________

Submitted Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 21 January 17, 2019

Before: JORDAN, GREENAWAY, JR. and NYGAARD
, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed : January 25, 2019 )

_________
OPINION *

_________
PER CURIAM
Pro se petitioner A nthony Fletcher seeks a writ of mandamus to compel the
District Court to hold a hearing on a motion he filed regarding his appointed counsel in

his underlying habeas proceedings in the District Court. Fletcher filed his mandamus
petition in November 2018. By order entered December 3, 2018, the District Court

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding pr ecedent.2 denied his motion. In light of the District Court’s action, Fletcher’s request regarding h is

now

- resolved motion is moot.
To the extent that Fletcher vaguely seeks “reassignment in the alternative,” see
Mandamus Petition at ECF p. 3, he has not demonstrated his entitlement to the
extraordinary remedy of mandamus relief. See Hollingsworth v. Pe rry , 558 U.S. 183,
190 (2010) (per curiam) (“Before a writ of mandamus may issue, a party must establish
that (1) no other adequate means [exist] to attain the relief he desires, (2) the party’s right
to issuance of the writ is clear and indisputable, and (3) the writ is appropriate under the
circumstances.”) (internal quotation marks omitted). Accordingly, we will dismiss
Fletcher’s petition.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 28 (Friday, February 10, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8096-8097]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-3373]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION


Documents Containing Reporting or Recordkeeping Requirements: 
Office of Management and Budget Review

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice of the Office of Management and Budget Review of 
Information Collection.

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

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has recently submitted to 
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review the following 
proposal [[Page 8097]] for collection of information under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).
    1. Type of submission, new, revision or extension: Revision.
    2. The title of the information collection: ``License Event 
Report.''
    3. The form number if applicable: NRC Forms: 366, 366A, and 366B.
    4. How often the collection is required: On occasion.
    5. Who will be required or asked to report: Holders of Operating 
Licenses for Commercial Nuclear Power Plants.
    6. An estimate of the number of responses: 1,500 per year.
    7. An estimate of the total number of hours needed annually to 
complete the requirement or request: Approximately 50 hours per 
response. The total industry burden is 75,000 hours.
    8. An indication of whether Section 3504(h), Pub. L. 96-511 
applies: Not Applicable.
    9. Abstract: NRC collects reports of operational events at 
commercial nuclear power plants in order to incorporate lessons of that 
experience in the licensing process and to feed back the lessons of 
that experience to the nuclear industry.
    Copies of the submittal may be inspected or obtained for a fee from 
the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW., Lower Level, 
Washington, DC 20037. Comments and questions can be directed by mail to 
the OMB reviewer:

Troy Hillier, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (3150-0104), 
NEOB-10202, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503

    Comments can also be submitted by telephone at (202) 395-3084.
    The NRC Clearance Officer is Brenda Jo Shelton, (301) 415-7230.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 6th day of February 1995.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Gerald F. Cranford,
Designated Senior Official for Information Resources Management.
[FR Doc. 95-3373 Filed 2-9-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
Exhibit
99.4








CERTIFICATE
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 (the “Report”) on the Form 10K of Siga
Resources, Inc. (the “Company”) for the year ended July 31, 2008, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Rohit Singh, Chief
Accounting Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Director, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. 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 and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





2. The
information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.








Date:
September 2, 2008








ROHIT
SINGH


Rohit
Singh


Chief
Accounting Officer


Chief
Financial Officer and Director











-1-
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 Transportation

# AGENCY:

Research and Innovative Technology Administration, Department of Transportation.

# ACTION:

Notice.

This notice announces a two-day IntelliDrive Deployment Scenarios Workshop to present and discuss the four draft IntelliDrive deployment scenarios that have been recently developed in response to key stakeholder input. The purpose of the workshop is to provide input to the U.S. DOT as it refines IntelliDrive research plans about potential future paths for IntelliDrive deployment. Discussions will be framed around four scenarios developed through stakeholder inputs. The workshop will engage participants to identify advantages and disadvantages of each of the draft scenarios and critical policy and institutional research needs. The Tuesday session will provide an overview of the four draft scenarios. The Wednesday session will consist of break-out groups to explore each of the four scenarios in detail as well as a concluding session that summarizes the findings from the workshop. The workshop will be held on June 22-23, 2010, at the Washington Dulles Airport Marriott, 45020 Aviation Drive, Dulles, Virginia.

Following is the workshop preliminary agenda: Day one; (1) Welcome remarks; (2) Expected outcomes from the workshop; (3) Overview of IntelliDrive deployment scenarios; (4) Identification of major issues and parameters for day two discussion; and (5) Questions and answers and instructions for day two. Day two; (1) Break-out sessions on deployment scenarios; (2) Report on break-out sessions; and (3) Outcomes, key takeaways, and summary.

                    The workshop will be open to the public and registration is free of charge using the ITS America registration process (                    *http://www.itsa.org/​itsa/​files/​pdf/​Registrtion%20Form%20Deployment%205-13-10.pdf*). Please fax your completed registration form to Brei Whitty at 202-484-3483 no later than June 15, 2010.                

Issued in Washington, DC, on the 2nd day of June 2010.

John Augustine,

Managing Director, ITS Joint Program Office.

[FR Doc. 2010-13658 Filed 6-7-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-HY-P
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 Defense

###### Department of the Navy

# AGENCY:

Department of the Navy, DoD.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Department of the Navy (DoN), after carefully weighing the strategic, operational, and environmental consequences of the proposed action, announces its decision to both accommodate future military operational increases and implement                               ( print page 6844)                            and complete a revised Comprehensive Land Use Management Plan (CLUMP) at Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake (NAWSCL), California as set out in Alternative 1 of the Final Environmental Impact Statement/Legislative Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIS/LEIS) for Renewal of Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake Public Land Withdrawal. Implementation of this alternative includes Congressional renewal of the public land withdrawal (25-year renewal), accommodation of an increase in Research, Development, Acquisition, Test, and Evaluation and training tempo (up to 25 percent) within current land use areas approved for designated uses, expansion of unmanned aerial and surface systems, and expansion of existing and introduction of evolving directed energy weapons development. Nonmilitary activities would continue according to current patterns of use. Proposed land use changes would be accommodated in accordance with the CLUMP and applicable NAWSCL approval processes. Natural and cultural resources would continue to be conserved with implementation of the CLUMP management process.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The complete text of the Record of Decision is available at                     *http://www.chinalakeeis.com.*                     Single copies of the Record of Decision are available upon request by contacting: Naval Facilities Engineering Command Southwest, Attn: Teresa Bresler, 1220 Pacific Highway, San Diego, CA 92132.                

Dated: February 3, 2016.

N.A. Hagerty-Ford,

Commander, Judge Advocate General's Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 2016-02512 Filed 2-8-16; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P
NUMBER 13-10-00632-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

JERMAINE D. MIDDLETON, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 329th District Court 

of Wharton County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Garza, Benavides, and Vela

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Jermaine D. Middleton, attempted to perfect an appeal from a 

conviction for possession of a firearm by a felon. We dismiss the appeal for want of 

jurisdiction.

Sentence in this matter was imposed on September 30, 2010. No motion for new 

trial was filed. Notice of appeal was filed on November 15, 2010. On November 18, 
2

2010, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that it appeared that the appeal was not 

timely perfected. Appellant was advised that the appeal would be dismissed if the defect 

was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of the Court=s directive. On 

December 2, 2010, the Court received a motion for leave to file notice of appeal.

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.2 provides that an appeal is perfected when 

notice of appeal is filed within thirty days after the day sentence is imposed or suspended 

in open court unless a motion for new trial is timely filed. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a)(1). The 

time within which to file the notice may be enlarged if, within fifteen days after the deadline 

for filing the notice, the party files the notice of appeal and a motion complying with Rule 

10.5(b) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See id. 26.3. Although the notice of 

appeal herein was filed within the fifteen day time period, no such motion for extension of 

time was filed within the fifteen day time period. See id. 

This Court's appellate jurisdiction in a criminal case is invoked by a timely filed 

notice of appeal. Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). AWhen a 

notice of appeal is filed within the fifteen-day period but no timely motion for extension of 

time is filed, the appellate court lacks jurisdiction.@ Olivo, 918 S.W.2d at 522. Absent a 

timely filed notice of appeal, a court of appeals does not obtain jurisdiction to address the 

merits of the appeal in a criminal case and can take no action other than to dismiss the 

appeal for want of jurisdiction. Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 

1998). Accordingly, appellant’s motion for leave to file notice of appeal is DENIED. 

Appellant may be entitled to an out-of-time appeal by filing a post-conviction writ of 

habeas corpus returnable to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals; however, the 

availability of that remedy is beyond the jurisdiction of this Court. See TEX. CODE CRIM.
3

PROC. ANN. art. 11.07, ' 3(a) (Vernon 2005); see also Ex parte Garcia, 988 S.W.2d 240 

(Tex. Crim. App. 1999). 

The appeal is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION. 

PER CURIAM

Do not publish. 

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the 

13th day of January, 2011.
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 3258 

To conduct or support further comprehensive research for the creation of 

a universal influenza vaccine or preventative. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 18, 2021 

Mr. MARKEY (for himself, Mr. VAN HOLLEN, Ms. KLOBUCHAR, Mr. 

BLUMENTHAL, and Ms. SMITH) introduced the following bill; which was 

read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 

and Pensions 

A BILL 

To conduct or support further comprehensive research for 

the creation of a universal influenza vaccine or preventative. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Flu Vaccine Act’’. 

5 SEC. 2. RESEARCH FOR THE CREATION OF A UNIVERSAL 

6 INFLUENZA VACCINE OR PREVENTATIVE. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Director of the National In8 stitute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases shall conduct or 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3258 IS

1 support comprehensive research for the creation of a uni2 versal influenza vaccine or preventative. 

3 (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—To carry 

4 out this section, there are authorized to be appropriated 

5 $200,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2022 through 2026. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
## Summary Measures and Graphs

- Individual Provisions
- Level of Monthly Benefits

### **Description of Proposed Provision:						B3.17: Increase the current-law first bend point by 22 percent and increase the 90 percent PIA factor to 95 percent for all beneficiaries eligible for benefits as of January 2024 and for those newly eligible for benefits after 2023. This provision will result in an approximate $257 increase in PIA for most workers newly eligible for retirement or disability benefits in 2024.**

|  |  |
|--|--|
NUMBER 13-15-00122-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

BAY CITY, TEXAS Appellant,

v.

WADE MCFARLAND, Appellee.

On appeal from the 23rd District Court 

of Matagorda County, Texas.

ORDER OF ABATEMENT 

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Perkes

Order Per Curiam

On August 3, 2016, the Matagorda County District Clerk forwarded to this Court a 

compact disc, which appellant purported to include in its plea to jurisdiction and motion 

for summary judgment as Exhibit-C. Appellant and appellee do not dispute that ExhibitC shows the dash-cam video of Officer Kimberly Kunz’s police vehicle on June 5, 2011. 
2

However, the compact disc forwarded to this Court is blank. The current state of the 

record raises a question regarding whether Exhibit-C has been lost or destroyed. 

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 34.5(e) provides as follows: 

If a filing designated for inclusion in the clerk's record has been lost or 

destroyed, the parties may, by written stipulation, deliver a copy of that item 

to the trial court clerk for inclusion in the clerk's record or a supplement. If 

the parties cannot agree, the trial court must—on any party's motion or at

the appellate court's request—determine what constitutes an accurate copy 

of the missing item and order it to be included in the clerk's record or a 

supplement.

TEX. R. APP. P. 34.5(e). 

This appeal is ABATED and the cause REMANDED to the trial court. Upon 

remand, the trial court shall conduct a hearing to determine first whether the compact disc 

forwarded to this Court is the same item that appellant attached to its motion as ExhibitC; if the compact disc is the same item, the trial court shall make that finding on the record 

and no further inquiry will be necessary. However, if the compact disc is not the same 

item, the trial court shall use whatever means necessary to locate the original and forward 

it to this Court as a supplement to the clerk’s record. If the original cannot be found, the 

trial court shall afford appellant and appellee an opportunity, by written stipulation, to 

deliver a copy of that item to the trial court clerk for inclusion as a supplement to the clerk’s 

record; if appellant and appellee cannot agree, the trial court shall determine what 

constitutes an accurate copy of Exhibit-C and order it to be included as a supplement to 

the clerk’s record. See id. 

The trial court shall prepare and file its findings and orders and cause them to be 
3

included in a supplemental clerk's record which should be submitted to the Clerk of this 

Court within fifteen days from the date of this order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed this

2nd day of September, 2016