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.                  

###### National Aeronautics and Space Administration

          - [Notice: 14-124]

# AGENCY:

National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

# ACTION:

Notice of postponement of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, as amended, NASA announces a postponement of the previously announced meeting of the NASA Advisory Council (NAC). The meeting had been scheduled to be held on December 8 and 9, 2014. The meeting is being postponed by NASA due to exceptional circumstances and schedule conflicts of the NASA top leadership in connection with post-launch programmatic requirements of the Orion Exploration Flight Test-1 (EFT-1) on December 4, 2014, at NASA Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Ms. Marla King, NAC Administrative Officer, NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC 20546, (202) 358-1148, or                         *marla.k.king@nasa.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The meeting was originally announced as NASA Notice 14-118 in the                     **Federal Register**                     on November 18, 2014, at 79 FR 68727. The meeting had been scheduled to be held on Monday, December 8, 2014, 1 p.m.-5 p.m.; and Tuesday, December 9, 2014, 9 a.m.-5 p.m., Local Time, at NASA Stennis Space Center, MS 39529.                

Patricia D. Rausch,

Advisory Committee Management Officer, National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

[FR Doc. 2014-28060 Filed 11-25-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7510-13-P
Exhibit 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-76817, 333-72841, and 333-41863) and Form S-3 (Nos. 333-121868 and 333-112464) of Mechanical Technology Incorporated of our report dated March 13, 2006 relating to the financial statements, management's assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K.  We also consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated March 13, 2006 relating to the financial statement schedule, which appears in the Form 10-K. 

 

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

 

Albany, New York

March 13, 2006
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN ITS QUARTERLY
REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1998 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                          67,115
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  476,647<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                    22,142<F2>
<INVENTORY>                                     30,924
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               631,079
<PP&E>                                       1,815,354
<DEPRECIATION>                                 652,637
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,131,817
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          373,440
<BONDS>                                        701,101
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        11,017
<OTHER-SE>                                     865,382
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,131,817
<SALES>                                        694,400
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               697,427
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  629,722
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                23,118
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0<F3>
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              15,488
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 29,099
<INCOME-TAX>                                    11,058
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             18,041
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    18,041
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.17
<FN>
<F1>EXCLUDES $23,060 OF LONG-TERM NOTES RECEIVABLE.
<F2>EXCLUDES $2,291 OF ALLOWANCE FOR DOUBTFUL LONG-TERM NOTES RECEIVABLE.
<F3>INCLUDED IN TOTAL COSTS AND EXPENSES LINE.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
# United States Court of Appeals **For the First Circuit**

No. 98-2143 ARNOLD W. VINICK, Plaintiff, Appellant,

v. UNITED STATES, Defendant, Appellee.

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS [Hon. Robert E. Keeton, U.S. District Judge ]

ERRATA SHEET The opinion of this Court issued on March 8, 2000, is amended as follows: Page 20, line 9: Add a new footnote number “8” after the period ending the sentence: “Responsibility during one period does not equate to responsibility in all periods.” The text for the new footnote 8 is as follows: “We do not meanto suggest that in all § 6672 cases a district court is precluded from considering evidence from outside the quarters in question. For example, behavior in one quarter, depending on the circumstances, could cast light on one's status as a responsible person in other quarters. Because one's function and status can change between quarters, however, it would be erroneous based solely on evidence from one quarter aut omatically to conclude that a person is responsible in another quarter.”Alter the subsequent footnotes' numbering accordingly.
EXHIBIT 10.3

                                Zone 4 Play, Inc.

                    SUMMARY OF DIRECTORS ONGOING COMPENSATION

The following is a summary of the currently effective ongoing compensation of
the Non Executive Directors (each, a "Director") of Zone 4 Play, Inc. (the
"Company") for services provided to the Company as Directors, which is subject
to modification at any time by the Board of Directors.

     Each Director shall receive annual cash compensation of $7,000 payable in
     quarterly installments and an additional $750 per each board meeting.
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 BLACKWATER MIDSTREAM CORP. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the year ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Donald St.Pierre, 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:   May 4, 2012By:
/s/ DONALD ST.PIERREDonald St.PierreChief Financial Officer
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed December

17 , 2019

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14- 19 -00852- CR

EX PARTE SHAUN PHILIP HARDY
On Appeal from the 212th District Court Galveston County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 17- CR -0003

MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant , Shaun Philip Hardy, has signed and filed a written request to withdraw his notice of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2. Because this court has not delivered an opinion, we grant appellant’s request. Accordingly, we order the appeal dismissed. We direct the clerk of the court to issue the mandate of the court immediately.
PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Zimmerer, Spain, and Hassan Do Not Publish – Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

EIS DEVELOPMENT II, LLC

,

Appellant,

v.

BUENA VISTA AREA ASSOCIATION,

LANCE W. HALL and HEATHER R.

HALL, JASON PAUL SMITHEY, DAVID

W. MOLENGRAAF and KIMBERLEY K.

MOLENGRAAF, ALEXANDER E.W.J.

SCHINDLER and ANGELA R.

SCHINDLER, as individuals

,

Appellees. §

§

§

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 22

- 00006

- CV

Appeal from the

40th District Court

of Ellis County, Texas

(TC# 104809 )

CORRECTED JUDGMENT

We vacate our judgment dated March 24, 2023, and enter this judgment in its place. The

Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the judgment.

We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below and its permanent inju n ction agains t EIS

. We

order that Appellee s recover from Appellant and its sureties, if any, see T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 43.5, for

performance of the judgment and all costs in the court below. We further order that Appellant and

Appellees each pay their respective one

- half (1/2) of the costs of this appeal

, for which let

execution issue. This decision shall be certified bel ow for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 12 TH DAY OF APRIL , 2023.

Y VONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Chief Justice

Before Rodriguez, C.J., Soto, J

. , and Marion, C.J. (Ret.)

Marion, C.J. (Ret.) (Sitting by Assignment)
UN PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21

- 1516

JOHN MICHAEL WOLFE

,

Plaintiff

- Appellant

,

v.

MARK R. HERRING, Attorney General, Commonwealth of Virginia

,

Defendant

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria

. Liam O ’ Grady, Senior District Judge. ( 1:20

- cv

- 00189

- LO

- JFA )

Submitted : September 9, 2021 Decided: September 13, 2021

Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN

, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed as modified by un published per curiam opinion

.

John Michael Wolfe , Appellant Pro Se

.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

John Michael Wolfe appeals the district court’s order dismis sing his 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983 complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *

Wolfe v. Herring , No. 1:20

- cv

- 00189

- LO

- JFA (E.D . Va. Mar. 30, 2021) . 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.

AFFIRME D AS MODIFIED

* Because the district court’s dismissal was for lack of subject matter jurisdiction,

we modify t he district court’s order to clarify that the dismissal is without prejudice. S ee S. Walk at Broadlands Home owner’s Ass ’ n v. OpenBand at Broadlands, LLC , 713 F.3d 175, 185 (4th Cir. 2013) (“ A dismissal for

. . . [a] defect in subject matter jurisdiction[] must be one without prejudice, because a court that lacks jurisdiction has no power to adjudicate and dispose of a claim on the merits.” ).
EX 99.3


OCEAN BANK company logo here


Management Assertion


As of and for the year ended December 31, 2004, Ocean Bank, F.S.B.
has complied in all material respects with the minimum servicing
standards set forth in the Mortgage Bankers Association of America's
Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers.  As
of and for this same period, Ocean Bank, F.S.B. had in effect a
fidelity bond and errors and omissions policy in the amounts of
$5,000,000 and $3,000,000 respectively.


/s/:  John M. Murphy
John M. Murphy
President and Chief Executive Officer

/s/:  Peter Lachapelle
Peter Lachapelle
Chief Operating Officer

Date:  March 15, 2005





Corporate Headquarters Two Altieri Way Warwick, Rhode Island 02886-1765
1.800.223.1700



Member of FDIC
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

DEC 26, 2006

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 06-13988

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 05-01723-CV-ORL-28-JGG

BKCY No. 04-11218-BK-3-G

IN RE: NICKOLAS C. BALLAS,

Debtor.

__________________________________

JONATHAN D. LEGG,

DIANE P. LEGG,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

versus

NICKOLAS C. BALLAS,

Defendant-Appellee.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

________________________

(December 26, 2006)

Before DUBINA, CARNES and COX, Circuit Judges.
2

PER CURIAM:

Jonathan D. Legg and Diane Legg (collectively, “the Leggs”) appeal the

district court’s affirmance of an order of the bankruptcy court that sustained Chapter

7 Debtor Nickolas C.Ballas’s objection to the Leggs’ motion for an extension of time

to file complaints pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§ 523 and 727. In an appeal from a district

court sitting as an appellate court in a bankruptcy case, this court employs the same

standards of review as the district court. In re Int'l Admin. Servs., Inc., 408 F.3d 689,

698 (11th Cir. 2005). In this case, we review the bankruptcy court’s action for abuse

of discretion.

The bankruptcy court found that the Leggs had not exercised sufficient due

diligence to demonstrate cause for the requested extension. We find no abuse of

discretion in that holding.

AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1



         Austin, Texas (March 25, 1998) ... TCC Industries, Inc. (NYSE:TEL)
announced today that it was in preliminary discussions to sell all of the shares
of its subsidiary, Paladin Financial, Inc., to an Acquisition Group consisting
of some of the senior management of Paladin.

         In summary, if a transaction is concluded, it is anticipated that the
sale would be completed within two weeks with the Acquisition Group retaining
most of the existing employees of Paladin and paying to TCC consideration
including its loans, advances and receivables.

         The original business plan for Paladin was to engage in the purchase,
securitization and sale of Fannie Mae Mortgage Backed Securities (FNMA-MBS) and
the purchase and sale, for cash, of a small quantity of 125 Loan to Value (LTV)
instruments (a 125 LTV is a type of non-prime conventional loan). In the six
months since the inception of the business plan, interest rates have trended
lower, consumer debt has risen and the 125 LTV product has begun to dominate the
market at the expense of the insured Title I loans. Several large companies in
the home equity business have been obliged to take large write-offs on their
loan portfolios and to restate prior year earnings.

         In the judgement of TCC's management, 125 LTV loans contain more
inherent risk (since they are for amounts in excess of the acknowledged asset
supporting the loan) than the Title I insured loans, and an expanded commitment
by TCC to such loans does not provide a basis for sustainable growth for TCC
shareholders. TCC management continues to believe that Title I insured loans do
provide such a basis and will maintain this line of business through its
subsidiary, Barton Creek Capital Corporation. The Acquisition Group believes
that TCC's view is overly conservative and has, accordingly, presented its
proposal to acquire the shares and pursue its business plan independent of TCC.

CONTACT: Robert Thomajan, President         
         Walter A. DeRoeck, Chairman                 
         512-708-5000
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 Commerce

###### Office of the Secretary

          - 15 CFR Part 4
          - [Docket No. 140127076-4935-03]
          - RIN 0605-AA33

# AGENCY:

Department of Commerce.

# ACTION:

Final rule; correction.

# SUMMARY:

The Department of Commerce (Department) is correcting a final rule, published on October 20, 2014, that revised the Department's regulations under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and Privacy Act. This final rule corrects the cross-references in the section describing the requirements for making FOIA requests.

# DATES:

Effective November 19, 2014.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mark R. Tallarico, Senior Counsel, (202) 482-8156, Office of the General Counsel, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    In FR Doc. 2014-24598 appearing on page 62553 in the                     **Federal Register**                     of Monday, October 20, 2014 (79 FR 62553), the following correction is made:                

§ 4.4 

On page 62559, in the second column, in § 4.4(c), the second to last sentence is corrected to read as follows:

“Such a notice constitutes an adverse determination under § 4.7(d) for which components shall follow the procedures for a denial letter under § 4.7(e).” 

Dated: November 13, 2014.

Catrina D. Purvis,

Chief Privacy Officer and Director of Open Government.

[FR Doc. 2014-27265 Filed 11-17-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-17-P
#### E. L. Osborne *v.*J. H. Bradshaw.

War — Property Taken — Promise Without Consideration.

Where a soldier at the command of -defendant took plaintiff’s mare when -defendant was- not present, the promise of defendant to isend the mare back or pay for her, being made without consideration, is unenforceable.

*425War — Taking Property — Liability.

The mere fact that the mare in question was taken by a soldier at defendant’s command, when defendant was not present, does not make him responsible for the trespass, and defendant’s failure to compel the soldier to surrender the mare when the colonel of his •regiment was present and in command can not be regarded as a ratification of the tort.

APPEAL PROM! POWELL CIRCUIT 'COURT. •

February 4, 1873.

*Hazelrigg, for appellant.*

*Holt, for appellee.*

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay :

The evidence heard upon the trial of this case utterly fails to show that Bradshaw participated, either directly or indirectly, in the taking of Osborne’s mare, or that he interposed any obstacle to its recovery. The mere fact that the mare was taken by a soldier under his command, he not being present, does not make him responsible in law for the trespass, and his failure to compel the soldier to sur-; render the mare, when the colonel of his regiment was present and in command can not be regarded as a ratification of the tort, and even if he did agree that he would subsequently send her back to the appellant or pay for her, the promise being without consideration can not be enforced. For these reasons a verdict against him would properly have been set aside as palpably against the weight of the evidence. Such being the case it is immaterial whether the instructions given by the court were correct or not.

Judgment *affirmed.*
108TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 421

AN ACT

To reauthorize the United States Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution, and for other

purposes.

108TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 421

AN ACT

To reauthorize the United States Institute for Environmental

Conflict Resolution, and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 421 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Environmental Policy

3 and Conflict Resolution Advancement Act of 2003’’.

4 SEC. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION FUND.

5 Section 13 of the Morris K. Udall Scholarship and

6 Excellence in National Environmental and Native Amer7 ican Public Policy Act of 1992 (20 U.S.C. 5609) is amend8 ed by striking subsection (b) and inserting the following:

9 ‘‘(b) ENVIRONMENTAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION

10 FUND.—There is authorized to be appropriated to the En11 vironmental Dispute Resolution Fund established by sec12 tion 10 $4,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through

13 2008, of which—

14 ‘‘(1) $3,000,000 shall be used to pay operations

15 costs (including not more than $1,000 for official re16 ception and representation expenses); and

17 ‘‘(2) $1,000,000 shall be used for grants or

18 other appropriate arrangements to pay the costs of

19 services provided in a neutral manner relating to,

20 and to support the participation of non-Federal enti21 ties (such as State and local governments, tribal

22 governments, nongovernmental organizations, and
3

•HR 421 EH

1 individuals) in, environmental conflict resolution pro2 ceedings involving Federal agencies.’’.

Passed the House of Representatives November 19,

2003.

Attest:

Clerk.