alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Rachael Whitefield","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/rachaellwhitefield-2-2-2\/","title":"Bob Hines NASA Astronaut","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"swj63ArIGP\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/bob-hines\/\">Bob Hines NASA Astronaut<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/bob-hines\/embed\/#?secret=swj63ArIGP\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Bob Hines NASA Astronaut” — NASA\" data-secret=\"swj63ArIGP\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/jsc2017e114858_0.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":750}
#### L. Styles, &c., *v.*G. W. Riley, &c.

Lien — Interest! *Note*— Release *Of.*

The giving of a note for the interest on a lien, is not a new debt, but the legal inurement of the lien debt, and an endorsed credit, nor taking of personal security without other evidence of actual acceptance as partial payment, cannot be considered as a release of the lien, pro tanto.

APPEAL PROM MARION CIRCUIT COURT.

October 12, 1870.

Thomas, *for appellants.*

*Bussell & A., for appellees.*

Opinion oe the Court by

Judge Robertson :

If, as urged by Riley’s counsel, Styles was not entitled to interest on the unpaid notes for- his land since the declaration of Bray’s bankruptcy, still, as he was charged with interest on his larger note as purchaser from the assignee without a credit for the lien notes, he was charged virtually with interest on his own money and the allowance complained of was, in effect, but a centralization of the unjust charge of interest against him.

The note for $274 seems to have been given for interest on the lien notes for the year 1865. That incidental interest was not a new debt, but the legal inurement of the lien debt, and' neither the endorsed credit nor the taking of personal security without other evidence of actual acceptance as partial payment can be considered, as tantamount to a. release of the lien *pro tanto.'*It seems to us, therefore, that the lien still subsists for so much of the note for $274 as was for interest. The decree disallowing the whole of the note is therefore adjudged erroneous.

But the disallowance of the $60 note was right.

Wherefore, the judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded for a credit of the note for $274 to the extent' hereinbefore indicated.
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.
 Small Business Administration [Disaster Declaration #14173 and #14174]
 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.
 ACTION: Notice.
 SUMMARY: This is a Notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of California (FEMA-4193-DR), dated 10/27/2014. *Incident:*
                         Earthquake. *Incident Period:*
                         08/24/2014 through 09/07/2014. *Effective Date:*
                         10/27/2014. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         12/29/2014. *Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         07/27/2015.
 ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the President's major disaster declaration on 10/27/2014, applications for disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties (Physical Damage and Economic Injury Loans):*
                     Napa, Solano. *Contiguous Counties (Economic Injury Loans Only):*( print page 65472) California: Contra Costa, Lake, Sacramento, Sonoma, Yolo. The Interest Rates are: Percent*For Physical Damage:*Homeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere
4.125Homeowners Without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.063Businesses With Credit Available Elsewhere
6.000Businesses Without Credit Available Elsewhere
4.000Non-Profit Organizations With Credit Available Elsewhere
2.625Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.625*For Economic Injury:*Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives Without Credit Available Elsewhere
4.000Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.625
 The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 141732 and for economic injury is 141740. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008) Jerome Edwards, Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.


[FR Doc. 2014-26137 Filed 11-3-14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
IIA

★(Star Print)

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 649

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 12, 1997

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural

Resources

AN ACT

To amend sections of the Department of Energy Organization Act that are obsolete or inconsistent with other

statutes and to repeal a related section of the Federal

Energy Administration Act of 1974.

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 ‘‘Department of Energy

5 Standardization Act of 1997’’.

6 SEC. 2. STANDARDIZATION OF DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

7 REQUIREMENTS WITH GOVERNMENT-WIDE

8 REQUIREMENTS.

9 (a) DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY REGULATIONS.—Sec10 tion 501 of the Department of Energy Organization Act

11 (42 U.S.C. 7191) is amended—
2

HR 649 RFS1S

1 (1) by striking subsections (b) and (d),

2 (2) by redesignating subsection (c) as sub3 section (b) and by redesignating subsections (e), (f),

4 and (g) as subsections (c), (d), and (e), respectively,

5 and

6 (3) in subsection (c) (as so redesignated), by

7 striking ‘‘subsections (b), (c), and (d)’’ and inserting

8 ‘‘subsection (b)’’.

9 (b) SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS AFFECTING ADVISORY

10 COMMITTEES.—

11 (1) SECTION 624.—Section 624 of the Depart12 ment of Energy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7234)

13 is amended by—

14 (A) striking ‘‘(a)’’; and

15 (B) striking subsection (b).

16 (2) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMEND17 MENT.—Section 17 of the Federal Energy Adminis18 tration Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 776) is repealed.

Passed the House of Representatives March 11,

1997.

Attest: ROBIN H. CARLE,

Clerk.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32.1

      CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
               PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SS. 1350 ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Report of Physical Spa & Fitness Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Ngai Keung Luk, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(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.

/s/ Ngai Keung Luk
-------------------------
Ngai Keung Luk
Chairman and
Chief Executive Officer

November 13, 2006
ROBERT WILLIAM WING, FORMER HUSBAND

,
Appellant,

v.

MONICA D'ARCIO WING, FORMER WIFE

,
Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 14

- 1494

_____________________________/

Opinion filed July 9, 2015.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval Cou nty

. Linda F. McCallum , Judge

.
Brian P. North, Mary Esther , for Appellant.

Corrine A. Bylund of Zisser, Brown, Nowlis, & Cabrey, P.A., Jacksonville , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

THOMAS

, MARSTILLER

, and BILBREY

, J J

. , CONCUR.
ORIGINAL 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

DA 21-0605 

BOARD OF REGENTS OF HIGHER 

EDUCATION OF THE STATE OF MONTANA, 

Petitioner and Appellee, 

v. 

THE STATE OF MONTANA, BY AND 

THROUGH AUSTIN KNUDSEN, IN HIS 

OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS ATTORNEY 

GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MONTANA, 

Respondent and Appellant. 

FILED 

FEB 1 8 2022 

Bowen Greenw000 Clerk of Supreme Court State of lw,,Itana 

ORDER 

This Court reviews briefs to ensure compliance with Rules 11 and 12 of the Montana 

Rules of Appellate Procedure. After reviewing the amicus curiae brief of Montana 

Shooting Sports Association electronically filed on February 17, 2022, this Court has 

determined that the brief does not comply with the below-referenced Rule and must be 

resubmitted. 

M. R. App. P. 11(6)(b)(iii) requires the cover page to include the name, the venue 

of the tribunal, and the judge in which the case originated or from which appeal is taken. 

Therefore, 

IT IS ORDERED that the referenced brief is rejected. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within ten (10) days of the date of this Order the 

Amicus shall electronically file with the Clerk of this Court this brief containing the 

revisions necessary to comply with the specified Rule and that Amicus shall serve copies 

of the revised brief on all parties of record; 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no changes, additions, or deletions other than 

those specified in this Order may be made to the brief as originally filed; and 

02/18/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0605
The Clerk is directed to provide a true copy of this Order to Amicus and to all parties 

of record. 

DATED this 18th day of February, 2022. 

?.-i /e Aiiit, 

Justice 

2
Exhibit 13.2



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



In connection with the
Annual Report of Veris Gold Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2013, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Shaun Heinrichs, Chief Financial Officer
of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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 results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: May 7, 2014



| | /s/ Shaun Heinrichs    
| | -----------------------
| | Shaun Heinrichs        
| | Chief Financial Officer
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Garrett Shea","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/garrett-shea-1nasa-gov\/","title":"NASA and Bastion: A Collaborative Teamwork Advancing Deep Space Exploration and Ensuring Safety in Missions\u00a0\u00a0","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"32u6z1UDpF\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/organizations\/osbp\/nasa-and-bastion\/\">NASA and Bastion: A Collaborative Teamwork Advancing Deep Space Exploration and Ensuring Safety in Missions\u00a0\u00a0<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/organizations\/osbp\/nasa-and-bastion\/embed\/#?secret=32u6z1UDpF\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“NASA and Bastion: A Collaborative Teamwork Advancing Deep Space Exploration and Ensuring Safety in Missions\u00a0\u00a0” — NASA\" data-secret=\"32u6z1UDpF\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/ksc-20221116-ph-clc02-0060-orig.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":900}
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                             552
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      862
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        524
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  5146
<PP&E>                                           14537
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   21246
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            10362
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            10
<OTHER-SE>                                        6078
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     21246
<SALES>                                           5362
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  5362
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     4771
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 146
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    476
<INCOME-TAX>                                       137
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                339
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   (33)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       306
<EPS-BASIC>                                      .03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .03


</TABLE>
8970.

#### HEATH *v.*SHACKELFORD BROTHERS.

Wade, C. J.

'Hone of the grounds of the motion for a new trial being argued in the brief of counsel for the plaintiif in error, they will be treated as abandoned. The general statement in the brief, that the plaintiff in error contends “that it was error not to grant a new trial *82on each and every ground of the original and amended motion for a new trial,” is not sufficient to change this well-established rule of practice. *Pelham Phosphate Co.*v. *Daniels,*21 *Ga. App.*549 (94 S. E. 846), and the numerous cases there cited.

Decided March 15, 1918.

Complaint; from Wilcox superior court—Judge Crum. May-19, 1917.

*M. B. Gannon, Max E. Land,*for plaintiff in error.

*Ilal Lawson,*contra.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Jenhins and Luhe, JJ., concur.*
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 Gramercy Capital Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-K as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John B. Roche, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



/s/ JOHN B. ROCHEName:

John B. RocheTitle:

Chief Financial Officer


March 16,
2009

---



QuickLinks
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

Plaintiff,

v. 

Arrow Nicholas Lopez,

Defendant.

No. CR-16-00114-01-PHX-SPL

DETENTION ORDER

On July 30, 2020, Defendant appeared before this Court on a petition for revocation 

of supervised release. The issue of detention was submitted to the Court. The Court 

considered the petition and file in determining whether Defendant should be released on 

conditions set by the Court.

The Court finds that Defendant, having previously been convicted and placed on 

supervised release, and having appeared before the Court in connection with a petition to

revoke his supervised release, has failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that 

he is not likely to flee or pose a danger to the safety of the community if released pursuant 

to Rule 46(d), and Rule 32.1(a)(6), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and 18 U.S.C. §

3143.

 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant be detained pending further 

proceedings. 

Dated this 30th day of July, 2020.

Honorable Eileen S. Willett

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 2:16-cr-00114-SPL Document 138 Filed 07/30/20 Page 1 of 1
#### B. P. Gorham *&*Wife *v.*S. R. Betts.

Guardian and Ward — Settlement—Dereliction of Duty — Costs.

A father was appointed guardian for his daughter. After a long period of time, during which only one settlement was made, the guardian filed ■suit to settle the account, for the reason that his ward refused to settle with him. Held, not to justify the entering of costs as against the ward, by reason of the dereliction of the guardiam

Same — Necessaries Furnished — Duties of Parents.

A parent, who is guardian of his only child, cannot be allowed to charge large sums out of the estate of his ward for her clothing, schooling, etc., so as to practically liquidate the estate in his. hands.

APPEAL PROM PAYETTE CIRCUIT COURT.

January 10, 1872.

Opinion op the Court by

Judge Pryor:

The record in tbis ease shows that the appellee was appointed trustee and .guardian for his daughter more than twenty years previous to. the institution of this suit. He has made only one or two settlements of his accounts as guardian, and by the present suit in equity against the appellants, his daughter and her husband, is seeking the aid of the chancellor for the settlement of his accounts, for the alleged reason that the appellants refuse to settle with him.

*477*Breckinridge &*Buchner, *for appellants.*

Polk, *for appellee.*

The long period of time intervening between the qualification of the appellee as guardian and the filing of this suit has afforded him ample opportunities to settle his accounts with the county commissioner, or county judge of his county as the law requires. If he had settled his accounts once in every two years there would have been no necessity for an accumulation of costs, and an expenditure of money such as must result from a settlement of his accounts in a court of equity.

After referring the case to the commissioner (and allowing to the appellee, who is the father and natural guardian of the appellant, Mrs. Gorham, and bound in law to provide and maintain her during her minority, or at least until she was able to maintain herself), large sums of money for clothing, schooling, etc., the ward is brought in debt to the appellee in the sum of $88. The court had no right to charge the estate of Mrs. Gorham with the expense incurred, for her maintenance and education. A case might occur where the estate of the child was ample for its support and the father being poor and unable to provide for the child, that the chancellor would require and authorize such expenditure out of the child’s property, but no such state of case is made to appear in this record.

These allowances should have been respected by the court below, and the appellee left without a settlement except for the benefit of the ward. A proper investigation of the accounts, between these parties, and excluding from the settlement the accounts where the interest is more than double the amount of the principal would result in a judgment for the appellants.

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the cause remanded with directions to dismiss the appellee’s petition.