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 the Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management

          - [WY-923-1310-FI; WYW161815]

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

# ACTION:

Notice of Proposed Reinstatement of Terminated Oil and Gas Lease.

# SUMMARY:

Under the provisions of 30 U.S.C. 188(d) and (e), and 43 CFR 3108.2-3(a) and (b)(1), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) received a petition for reinstatement from Retamco Operating Inc. for competitive oil and gas lease WYW161815 for land in Carbon County, Wyoming. The petition was filed on time and was accompanied by all the rentals due since the date the lease terminated under the law.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Bureau of Land Management, Pamela J. Lewis, Chief, Branch of Fluid Minerals Adjudication, at (307) 775-6176.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The lessee has agreed to the amended lease terms for rentals and royalties at rates of $10.00 per acre, or fraction thereof, per year and 16                    2/3                     percent, respectively. The lessee has paid the required $500 administrative fee and $163 to reimburse the Department for the cost of this                     **Federal Register**                     notice. The lessee has met all the requirements for reinstatement of the lease as set out in sections 31(d) and (e) of the Mineral Lands Leasing Act of 1920 (30 U.S.C. 188), and the Bureau of Land Management is proposing to reinstate lease WYW161815 effective April 1, 2008, under the original terms and conditions of the lease and the increased rental and royalty rates cited above. BLM has not issued a valid lease affecting the lands.                

Pamela J. Lewis,

Chief, Branch of Fluid Minerals Adjudication.

[FR Doc. E8-19964 Filed 8-27-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-22-P
EXHIBIT 32





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF


THE SARBANES OXLEY ACT OF 2002


The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with this report on Form 10-Q for the purpose of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Exchange Act and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.





Steven J. Johnston, the chairman and chief executive officer, and Michael J. Sewell, the chief financial officer, of Cincinnati Financial Corporation each certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:


1. the report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and


2. the information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Cincinnati Financial Corporation.





Date: April 25, 2024





/S/ Steven J. JohnstonSteven J. Johnston, FCAS, MAAA, CFA, CERAChairman and Chief Executive Officer/S/ Michael J. SewellMichael J. Sewell, CPAChief Financial Officer, Executive Vice President and Treasurer(Principal Accounting Officer)
**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 Annual Report of Cannabis Sativa, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the “Report”), I, David Tobias, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 results of operations of the Company. |

 

| Dated: April 18, 2023 |   | /s/ David Tobias        |   |
|-----------------------|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|                  |   | David Tobias            |   |
|                  |   | Chief Financial Officer |   |
#### Randy Glenn CLARY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James STROUD, Sheriff; Unidentified Kissinger; J.R. Kissinger, Jailer; Unidentified Langly, Jailer; Unidentified Howeth, Sergeant, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 02-40983.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

July 30, 2003.

Before JOLLY, JONES and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURLAM.*

Randy Glenn Clary (TDCJ # 1073341) appeals the magistrate judge’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint following a bench trial. We reject the appellees’ contention that the notice of appeal was timely only with respect to the denial of the motion for a new trial. Although it was not filed until later, Clary submitted his motion for a new trial within 10 days after the entry of final judgment. *See Houston v. Lack,*487 U.S. 266, 276, 108 S.Ct. 2379, 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988). Accordingly, the time for filing the notice of appeal began to run from the disposal of the post-judgment motion. *See Mangieri v. Clifton,*29 F.3d 1012, 1015 n. 5 (5th Cir.1994).

We find no abuse of discretion in the denial of Clary’s motion for a continuance, or in the denial of his motion for the appointment of counsel. *See Streber v. Hunter,*221 F.3d 701, 736 (5th Cir.2000); *Ulmer v. Chancellor,*691 F.2d 209, 212 (5th Cir.1982). The magistrate judge did not exclude relevant testimony or improperly participate in the trial. Nor did the magistrate judge abuse his discretion in denying the motion for a new trial. *Streber,*221 F.3d at 736.

AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir R. 47.5.4.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32(a) CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 (AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002) I, Sherrill Stone, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of
Peerless Mfg. Co. (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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended
March 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Company as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the
Report. /s/ Sherrill StoneSherrill StoneChairman of the Board and
Chief Executive OfficerDate: May 14, 2004
Exhibit 10.1


		
			Exhibit 10.1
		

		
			FIRST AMENDMENT
		

		
			 
		

		
			TO THE
		

		
			 
		

		
			SYSCO CORPORATION MANAGEMENT SAVINGS PLAN
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			Pursuant to the authority granted the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of Sysco Corporation (the "Compensation Committee") under Section 10.1 of the Sysco Corporation Management Savings Plan (the "MSP"), effective January 31, 2014, the Compensation Committee hereby amends the MSP as follows:
		

			
	
			
				 1.
			

			
	
			
			The first sentence of Section 5.4 of the MSP is amended to read in its entirety as: 




		
			 
		

		
			"The  credit  balance  of  the  Deferrals  and  Company  Contributions  in  the Participant's  Account shall be deemed to be invested and reinvested from time to time in such Investments as shall be designated by the Participant in accordance with this Section 5.4.
		

		
			 
		

		
			IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment 2014-1 to the MSP has been executed as of this 20th day of February, 2014.
		

		
			 
		

		
			SYSCO  CORPORATION
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

			
					
						 

					
					
						 

				
	
					
						 

					
					
						By: /s/ Russell Libby                                             

				
	
					
						 

					
					
						           Russell Libby, General Counsel
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 Quarterly Report (the Report) of Powell Industries, Inc.
(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended July 31, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Don R. Madison, Vice
President and 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 represents, in all material
               respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|--- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|                           |                                                                                
|-------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date:    September 3, 2004 | /s/    DON R. MADISON
Don R. Madison
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE> 


                                                                  Exhibit 12 (b)
                               J. C. Penney Company, Inc.
                             and Consolidated Subsidiaries
                                            
               Computation of Ratios of Available Income to Fixed Charges






                                              53 weeks               52 weeks
                                                ended                  ended
                                                May 2,                Apr. 26,
     ($ Millions)                                1998                   1997 
                                              _________             __________

     Income from continuing operations        $     978             $     903
        (before income taxes and
        capitalized interest)

     Fixed charges

     Interest (including capitalized
     interest) on:

        Operating leases                            180                   110
        Short term debt                              96                   127
        Long term debt                              564                   341
        Capital leases                                6                     7
        Credit facility                              -                     19
        Other, net                                  (11)                    2 
                                              _________             _________
     Total fixed charges                            835                   606
                                                                               
                                              _________             _________
     Total available income                   $   1,813             $   1,509
                                              =========             =========


     Ratio of available income to
        fixed charges                               2.2                   2.5 
                                              =========             =========



     The interest cost of the LESOP notes guaranteed by the Company is not
     included in fixed charges above.

     The Company believes that, due to the seasonal nature of its business,
     ratios for a period of time other than a 53 week or a 52 week period are
     inappropriate.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

**THOMAS FRANCIS TRUE, IV,**

**Petitioner**

**v.**

**PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF LAW**
**EXAMINERS,**

**Respondent :** 

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**: No. 185 MM 2014** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 8th day of April, 2015, the Petition for Revi ew per Pa.B.A.R. 222** 

**is** DENIED

**.**
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with this QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q of The Pep Boys - Manny, Moe & Jack (the “Company”)for the quarterly period ending October 30, 2010, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),

 

I, Michael R. Odell, President andChief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

 

(i)                                     The Report fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

 

(ii)                                  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, inall material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

 

A signed original of this writtenstatement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company andwill be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

 
| Date: December 7, 2010 | by:                                    | /s/ Michael R. Odell |
|----------------------------------|----------------------------------------|---------------------------|
|                             | Michael R. Odell                       |
|                             | President and Chief Executive  Officer |
|                             | (Principal Executive Officer)          |

 

1

----
Order entered November 19, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00476-CV

IN THE GUARDIANSHIP OF E.F.L., AN INCAPACITATED PERSON

On Appeal from the Probate Court No. 2

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. PR-13-1586-2

ORDER

Before the Court is appellant’s October 29, 2014 fourth motion for an extension of time 

to file a brief. Appellant sought a fifteen-day extension to November 8, 2014. As of today’s 

date, appellant has not filed a brief. Accordingly, we DENY appellant’s motion as moot.

On the Court’s own motion, we ORDER appellant to file her brief by DECEMBER 1, 

2014. We caution appellant that if she fails to file a brief by December 1, 2014, the Court may 

dismiss her appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1) & 42.3(b).

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS 

JUSTICE
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-01-2000
<CASH>                                           3,732
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   53,611
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,915
<INVENTORY>                                     53,894
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               117,787
<PP&E>                                         292,611
<DEPRECIATION>                                 109,709
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 417,791
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           84,637
<BONDS>                                        437,050
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     36,955
<COMMON>                                             6
<OTHER-SE>                                   (160,040)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   417,791
<SALES>                                        204,368
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               204,392
<CGS>                                          156,902
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  190,905
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   751
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              23,794
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (10,895)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        24
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (10,919)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  1,022
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (11,941)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
### NEY GENERAL EXAS:

PRICE DANIEL ATTORNEY CE.NEHAL February 2, 1949
Han. J. G.Knight County Attorney Bee County Beeville, Texas

Dear Sir: OpinionNo. V-765 Re: The legality of errployment by a county commissioner of a son of his stepmotherby anothermarriage, under the Nepotism Statute.
You request an opinion upon the above subject matter as follows:

LW. GilbertRarris, Commissioner ofPrecinctNo. 1, in Bee County, Texas, is desirous of employing 3s an employee of his Precinct a
, son of his stepmotherby anothermarriage, and he has requested that I obtain s ruling from your office as towhether such employment is prohibited or not." The Nepotism Statute (P. C. Art. 432) forbids the Commissioner to employ onewho is related to him by consanguinity or blood within the third degree, or by affinitywithin the second degree,

Under your statementthe Comg;i.s;ioyr is not related by blood to his stepbrother. t under the statementmade by you we have no means of de&mining whether he has any affinitive kinshipwhatsoever.

By the rule of affinity relations, the Commissioner, if he is amarried man, is related to his wife's blood relativeswithin the second. dbgree. Specifically, in such case he would be related to his stepbrother,the proposed appointee,by affinity only in the event his wife is related by bloodwithin the second degree to his stepbrother; that is to say,where she is the sister, first cousin,niece, or aunt of his stepbrother.

If the Commissioner is not amarried man he of course has no kin by affinity, and nothing in theNepotism Statute forbids the appointment of his stepbrother.Hon. J. G. Knight - Page 2 (V-765)

SUMMARY A county commissioner is not relatedby consanguinityto the son of his stepmotherby a formermarriage, nor can he be related by affinity if he is unmarried. (P. '2. Art. 432). Yours very truly, A'M'ORNEY

GENERAL OF TEXAS

0S:wb 

# By

o&& Assistant

APPROVED:
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

In the Matter of: MICHAEL T. KEYS,

 Debtor,

CHARLENE VAN DEUSEN,

 Appellant,

 v.

MICHAEL T. KEYS,

 Appellee.

No. 10-56114

D.C. No. 2:08-cv-05652-GW

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

George H. Wu, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted June 6, 2012

Pasadena, California

Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, TROTT and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

FILED

JUN 26 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
page 2

A state court imposed a lien on Keys’s home in Oxnard, California (“Oxnard

home”). The bankruptcy court avoided the lien pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(1),

and the district court affirmed. Van Deusen appeals. 

1. A debtor may avoid a lien under section 522(f)(1) unless it arose before

or at the same time as the debtor acquired the property interest at issue. Farrey v.

Sanderfoot, 500 U.S. 291, 296 (1991). Keys purchased the Oxnard home in 1998

and the Superior Court imposed the lien in 2007. Therefore, he “possessed the

interest to which the lien fixed, before it fixed.” Id. at 299. 

Van Deusen argues that Farrey applies because the conduct that gave rise to

the lien occurred before Keys purchased the Oxnard home. A lien created under

California law sometimes “relates [back] to the time it was created by the conduct

of the parties,” Hise v. Superior Court, 134 P.2d 748, 755 (Cal. 1943), but not

here. Like the district court, we’re not aware of any “case . . . in which a

bankruptcy court, district court, or the Ninth Circuit has applied the Hise rule in the

context of lien avoidance under § 522(f), as opposed to the context of

acknowledging . . . the bankruptcy court’s own ability to impose an equitable lien.” 

Van Deusen v. Keys (In re Keys), No. 08-5652-GW, 2010 WL 2730904, at *3

(C.D. Cal. July 2, 2010) (footnote omitted). 
page 3

2. Van Deusen offers no authority that establishes an unjust enrichment

exception to section 522(f)(1). We may not create new common law exceptions to

statutory rules—especially those designed to give debtors a fresh start. See

Webber v. Credithrift of Am., Inc. (In re Webber), 674 F.2d 796, 798 (9th Cir.

1982).

3. The bankruptcy court didn’t abuse its discretion in denying Van Deusen’s

motion for reconsideration. See First Ave. W. Bldg., LLC v. James (In re Onecast

Media, Inc.), 439 F.3d 558, 561 (9th Cir. 2006).

AFFIRMED.
#### CITY OF MIAMI, Florida, a municipal corporation, Appellant, v. John C. GIRTMAN, as Guardian of the person and property of Lewis R. Snyder, Appellee.

Supreme Court of Florida, Special Division A.

July 18, 1956.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 13, 1956.

Olavi M. Hendrickson, Henry Burnett and Cody Fowler of the firm of Fowler, White, Gillen, Yancey & Humlcey, Miami, for appellant.

Nichols, Gaither, Green, Frates & Beck-ham, William S. Frates, and Sam Daniels, Miami, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This cause came on to be heard on the motion of appellee to affirm the judgment appealed from pursuant to Rule 38 of the rules of this court, 31 F.S.A., and it appearing to the court from an examination of the record that said motion is appropriate and seasonably made and that it is manifest that the questions raised on appeal are without substantial merit and need no further argument;

It is accordingly ordered, adjudged and decreed that the motion to affirm the judgment appealed from be, and the same is, hereby granted, and the judgment is

Affirmed.

TERRELL, Acting Chief Justice, and THOMAS, HOBSON and BUFORD, JJ., concur.