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

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4412 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4412

 To amend the Clayton Act to clarify the application of the antitrust 
                laws in the telecommunications industry.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 20, 2004

    Mr. Sensenbrenner (for himself and Mr. Conyers) introduced the 
  following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Clayton Act to clarify the application of the antitrust 
                laws in the telecommunications industry.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Clarification of Antitrust Remedies 
in Telecommunications Act of 2004''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENT.

    The Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 12 et seq.) is amended by inserting 
after section 3 the following:
    ``Sec. 3A. (a) It shall be unlawful for an incumbent local exchange 
carrier or an affiliate to create or to preserve (or to attempt to 
create or to preserve) a monopoly in any part of commerce by using its 
network (or by providing a service over its network) to engage in an 
anticompetitive practice (which may include a failure to comply with 
either section 251(c) or 271 of the Communications Act of 1934 or with 
any agreement, rule, or order in effect under such section).
    ``(b) For purposes of this section--
            ``(1) the term `affiliate' has the meaning given such term 
        in section 274(i) of the Communications Act of 1934; and
            ``(2) the term `incumbent local exchange carrier' means a 
        Bell operating company as defined in section 274(i) of the 
        Communications Act of 1934.
    ``(c) Whether any agency regulates or is authorized to consider, 
review, or redress the conduct proscribed by this section shall not 
affect the applicability of this section, except that conduct required 
by an agency regulation or rule shall not be construed to create 
liability under this section.''.

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE; APPLICATION OF AMENDMENT.

    (a) Effective Date.--Except as provided in subsection (b), this Act 
and the amendment made by this Act shall take effect on the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
    (b) Application of Amendment.--Subsection (a) of section 3A of the 
Clayton Act, as added by this Act, shall not apply with respect to a 
person's conduct occurring before the effective date of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 225 (Friday, November 21, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 69478]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-27607]


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

FEDERAL RETIREMENT THRIFT INVESTMENT BOARD


Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board

AGENCY: Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the appointment of the members of the 
Senior Executive Service Performance Review Boards for the Federal 
Retirement Thrift Investment Board. The purpose of the Performance 
Review Boards is to make written recommendations on annual summary 
ratings to the appointing authority on the performance of senior 
executives.

DATES: This notice is effective November 18, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Powell, HR Specialist, at 202-
942-1681.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title 5, U.S. Code, 4314(c)(4), requires 
that the appointment of Performance Review Board members be published 
in the Federal Register before Board service commences. The following 
persons will serve on the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board's 
Performance Review Boards which will review initial summary ratings to 
ensure the ratings are consistent with established performance 
requirements, reflect meaningful distinctions among senior executives 
based on their relative performance and organizational results and 
provide recommendations for ratings, awards, and pay adjustments in a 
fair and equitable manner: Jay Ahuja, Jim Courtney, Susan Crowder, 
Thomas Emswiler, Tracey Ray, Renee Wilder.

Megan Grumbine,
Deputy General Counsel, Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board.
[FR Doc. 2014-27607 Filed 11-20-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6760-01-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.                  

###### National Science Foundation

# AGENCY:

National Science Foundation

# ACTION:

Notice of permits issued under the Antarctic Conservation of 1978, Public Law 95-541.

# SUMMARY:

The National Science Foundation (NSF) is required to publish notice of permits issued under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978. This is the required notice.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Li Ling Hamady, ACA Permit Officer, Division of Polar Programs, Rm. 755, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230. Or by email:                         *ACApermits@nsf.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    On October 30, 2014 the National Science Foundation published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     of a permit application received. The permit was issued on December 1, 2014 to:                

Dr. Diana H. Wall Permit No. 2015-012

Nadene G. Kennedy,

Polar Coordination Specialist, Division of Polar Programs.

[FR Doc. 2014-28578 Filed 12-4-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
Exhibit 32(ii)

Certification of Eunice R. Campbell





CERTIFICATION  PURSUANT TO THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Eunice R. Campbell, Principal Financial Officer of Metaline Mining & Leasing Company (the Company) do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



1.  This Annual Report on Form 10KSB of the Company for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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:  April 14, 2005

/s/ Eunice R. Campbell

___________________________

Eunice R. Campbell

Principal Financial Officer
Exhibit 21

THE MIDLAND COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARIES

Exhibit (21) - Subsidiaries of the Registrant

December 31, 2005

The
subsidiaries of the registrant as of December 31, 2005, all of which are included in the consolidated financial statements, are as follows:



|                                                        |  |                       |  |                               
|------------------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------- |  | ------------------------------
|                                                        |  | State ofIncorporation |  | Percentageof VotingStock Owned
|M/G Transport Services, Inc.                            |  | Ohio                  |  | 100                           
|Midland-Guardian Co.                                    |  | Ohio                  |  | 100                           
|MGT Services, Inc.                                      |  | Ohio                  |  | 100                           
|                                                        |  |                      
|SUBSIDIARIES OF MIDLAND-GUARDIAN CO.:                   |  |                       |  |                               
|American Modern Insurance Group, Inc.                   |  | Ohio                  |  | 100                           
|                                                        |  |                      
|SUBSIDIARIES OF AMERICAN MODERN INSURANCE GROUP, INC.:  |  |                       |  |                               
|American Modern Home Insurance Company                  |  | Ohio                  |  | 100                           
|American Family Home Insurance Company                  |  | Florida               |  | 100                           
|American Modern Life Insurance Company                  |  | Ohio                  |  | 100                           
|Lloyds Modern Corporation                               |  | Texas                 |  | 100                           
|American Modern Home Service Company                    |  | Ohio                  |  | 100                           
|Modern Services Group, Inc.                             |  | Ohio                  |  | 100                           
|American Modern Financial Services, Inc.                |  | Ohio                  |  | 100                           
|                                                        |  |                      
|SUBSIDIARIES OF AMERICAN MODERN HOME INSURANCE COMPANY: |  |                       |  |                               
|American Modern Lloyds Insurance Company                |  | Texas                 |  | 100                           
|American Southern Home Insurance Company                |  | Florida               |  | 100                           
|American Western Home Insurance Company                 |  | Oklahoma              |  | 100                           
|G.U.I.C. Insurance Company                              |  | Ohio                  |  | 100
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
THE REGISTRANT'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1998
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY TO SUCH FORM 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         707,747
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               707,747
<PP&E>                                           4,227
<DEPRECIATION>                                     564
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,006,435
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           38,555
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        4,353,237
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         6,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 (3,557,567)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,006,435
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                17,763
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,503,460
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,451
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,512,721)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,512,721)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,512,721)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.25)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.25)
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 4.1


 


Executive employment agreement – Mr John M Stewart (as
Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer)


 


The executive
employment agreement of Mr John M Stewart is incorporated by reference to
National Australia Bank Limited’s Annual Report on Form 20-F for the
fiscal year ended September 30, 2004 as filed with the Commission on January 20,
2005.
11091.

#### CITIZENS BANKING CO. *v.*JONES.

There being evidence in support of the verdict, and the only question before this court being as to the sufficiency of the evidence to authorize the verdict, which was approved by the trial judge, his judgment overruling the motion for a new trial must be affirmed.

Decided March 2, 1920.

*811Complaint; from city court of Eastman—Judge Enox presiding. September SO, 1919.

*Roberts & Smith, W. M. Clements,*for plaintiff in error.

*W. A. Wooten, O. J. Franklin,*contra.

Luke, J.

This case is here upon the general ground that the evidence does not authorize the verdict, the special ground being without merit and having been virtually abandoned in the brief of counsel for plaintiff in error. The plaintiff’s evidence amply authorizes, if it does not demand, a verdict in his favor. The evidence of the defendant likewise is as strong in its favor.' The record shows there have been two trials of the case. On the first trial a verdict was rendered for the plaintiff, and on the second trial a like verdict was rendered. The court granted the defendant a new trial in the first instance, and refused a new trial in the second instance. The judge unqualifiedly approved the verdict upon the second trial, in the exercise of his discretion, by overruling the motion for a new trial. Where the only question raised by a motion for á new trial is as to the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict, and where there is evidence to authorize the verdict, and the finding of the jury is approved by the trial court, this court under the uniform rulings .of the Supreme Court and of this court must affirm the judgment overruling the motion.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.*
Amendment to
GREM USA 2005 STOCK OPTION PLAN,
DATED APRIL 29, 2005


Pursuant to a meeting of the sole director of GREM USA on November 15,
2005, Section 6 of the GREM USA 2005 Stock Option Plan dated April 29,
2005 shall be revised to read as follows:

TOTAL NUMBER OF SHARES OF COMMON STOCK

The total number of shares of Common Stock reserved for issuance
by the Company either directly or underlying Options granted
under this Plan shall not be more than 550,000,000. The total
number of shares of Common Stock reserved for such issuance may
be increased only by a resolution adopted by the Board of
Directors and amendment of the Plan.   Such Common Stock may be
authorized and unissued or reacquired common stock of the
Company.


The terms and provisions of the amendment of this Plan shall be binding
upon, and shall inure to the benefit of, each Participant, his
executives or administrators, heirs, and personal and legal
representatives.

         Dated the 16th day of November 2005.

                                        GREM USA

                                        By: /s/ Edward Miers
                                            --------------------------
                                            Edward Miers, President
Exhibit 10.1


 


	
  STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

  	
   

  	
  IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION

  
	
  COUNTY OF MECKLENBURG

  	
   

  	
  00-CVS-10358

  



 


	
  SUNBELT
  RENTALS, INC., a North Carolina

  	
  )

  	
   

  
	
  Corporation,

  	
  )

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  )

  	
  STIPULATION OF

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  SETTLEMENT

  
	
  Plaintiff,

  	
  )

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  )

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  )

  	
   

  
	
  v.

  	
  )

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  )

  	
   

  
	
  HEAD
  & ENGQUIST EQUIPMENT, L.L.C.,

  	
  )

  	
   

  
	
  d/b/a
  H&E HI-LIFT, ROBERT HEPLER, 

  	
  )

  	
   

  
	
  DOUGLAS
  KLINE, MICHAEL QUINN,

  	
  )

  	
   

  
	
  GREGG
  L. CHRISTENSEN, PATRICK C.

  	
  )

  	
   

  
	
  MULDOON,
  MICHELE U. DOUGHERTY and 

  	
  )

  	
   

  
	
  BRIAN
  W. PEARSALL,

  	
  )

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  )

  	
   

  
	
  Defendants.

  	
  )

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  )

  	
   

  



 


Plaintiff Sunbelt Rentals, Inc. (“Sunbelt”) and
the Defendants hereby stipulate as follows:


 


1.             The parties have reached
a settlement agreement whereby:


 


a.  Defendants will dismiss with prejudice the
Petition for Discretionary Review to the North Carolina Supreme Court no later than
5:00 p.m., November 23, 2005;


 


b.  Defendants agree to wire to Sunbelt the sum of
$20,133,972.60 by 2:00 p.m., November 28, 2005, in accordance with wiring instructions
provided by Sunbelt.


 


c.  On
confirmation of receipt of the wired funds as provided for in paragraph 1(b)
above, Sunbelt agrees to release any interest in the Letter of Credit, as
amended, which was obtained as an undertaking to stay execution on the judgment
in this case and now totals $20,133,972.60, to Defendants, and Defendants may
cancel the Letter of Credit;


 





















 


d.  Sunbelt agrees to mark the Judgment “paid,”
and not to seek any additional attorneys’ fees, damages, interest or costs in
this action; and


 


e.  The parties will execute further settlement
documents, to the extent desired and necessary to finalize all terms of this
settlement.


 


2.             The parties respectfully request that the
Clerk of Court release the Letter of Credit to the Defendants, and Sunbelt
consents to that release, upon
confirmation of receipt of the wired funds as provided in paragraph 1(b) above.


 


This 23rd
day of November, 2005.


 


	
   

  	
  /s/ William L. Rikard,
  Jr., Esq.

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  William L. Rikard, Jr.,
  Esq.

  
	
   

  	
  N. C. State Bar No. 3701 

  
	
   

  	
  Attorney for the Plaintiff

  



 


OF
COUNSEL:


Parker
Poe Adams & Bernstein, LLP


Three
Wachovia Center


401
South Tryon Street, Suite 3000


Charlotte,
NC 28202


(704)
372-9000


 


	
   

  	
  /s/ Paul M. Navarro

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Paul M. Navarro

  
	
   

  	
  N. C. State Bar No. 25428

  
	
   

  	
  Attorney for the
  Defendants

  



 


OF
COUNSEL:


Helms
Mulliss & Wicker, PLLC


201
North Tryon Street


Charlotte,
NC 28202


(704)
343-2000


 


2
Pursuing Rural Disaster Resilience

Upper Sandy River

Clackamas County, Oregon 

Jay Wilson 

Resilience Coordinator

Clackamas County Emergency Management
History Repeats – Channel Migration Hazard

1964

2011

Erosion Hazard – Not Flooding

• Flood Maps become obsolete

• No hazard disclosure

• Community need for facts

• Regulatory framework?
Basis of Risk = Volcanic Landscape

• Living inside of an INCISED LAHAR

TEXT

• Subtext

• Subtext
Channel Migration Zone Mapping

TEXT

• TEXT

TEXT

• Subtext

• Subtext
Public Involvement Project

Flood Risk Management Committee

Need for stakeholder and 

community engagement

TEXT

• Subtext

• Subtext

January 22, 2011, Town Hall Meeting - Welches Middle School
Currently – Snow Dominated Zone

Capacity for Storage of Precipation

• TEXT

TEXT

• Subtext

• Subtext
Future Conditions - More Rain, Less Snow

Climate Projection for 2080

• TEXT

TEXT

• Subtext

• Subtext
Pursuit of Disaster Resilience 

• Planning and Policies for Future Recovery

Current Mitigation

• Hazard ID and Risk Assessment - Mapping

• No Adverse Impacts

• Limited Growth – Moratorium

• Emphasis on Flood Insurance

• Willing Sellers

• Acquisitions, Land Swaps, Conservation Easements

• Relocation of Infrastructure – Roads, Bridges, Sewer

• Watershed wide approach

• USACE Pilot Public Involvement
10921.

#### Jenkins *v.*The State.

Bloodworth, J.

1. “In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it maybe inferred that a liquor called for and delivered and paid for as whisky is whisky, and therefore an intoxicating liquor.” *Tompkins*v. *State,*2 *Ga. App.*639 (58 S. E. 1111); *Lewis*v. *State,*6 *Ga. App.*779 (65 S. E. 842).

*543Decided December 9, 1919.

Accusation of sale of liquor; from city court of Dawson—Judge Edwards. September 5, 1919.

*R. R.*Marlin, *Parles & Paries,*for plaintiff in error.

*W. PL. Gurr, solicitor,*contra.

2. The special ground of the motion for new trial complains that the court erred in allowing in evidence the following: “I found some whisky there the next day. It was not in her house. It was in a car at the house. A man named Daniel of Eufaula had charge of the ear.” This testimony was objected to as “illegal and irrelevant.” The court did not err in admitting it, as the fact stated therein was a circumstance which the jury would be authorized to consider in connection with the other evidence in determining as to the guilt of the accused. *Cole*v. *State,*120 *Ga.*485 (1) (48 S. E. 156); *Craig*v. *State,*9 *Ga. App.*233 (1) (70 S. E. 974).

3. There was ample evidence to support the verdict, which has the approval of the trial judge; no error of law appears, and the judgment is

*Affirmed.*

*Broyles, O. J., and Luke, J., eoncur.*
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1



                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We hereby consent to the use in the Prospectus constituting part of this
Registration Statement on Form S-1 of our report dated February 1, 1998, except
as to Note 10, which is as of July 9, 1998, relating to the financial
statements of broadcast.com, which appears in such Prospectus. We also consent
to the application of such report to the Financial Statement Schedule for the
period from May 19, 1995 (inception) to December 31, 1995 and the two years
ended December 31, 1997 listed under Item 16 (b) of this Registration Statement
when such schedule is read in conjunction with the financial statements referred
to in our report. The audits referred to in such report also included this
schedule. We also consent to the references to us under the headings "Experts"
and "Selected Financial Data" in such Prospectus. However, it should be noted
that PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP has not prepared or certified such "Selected
Financial Data."




PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

   
Dallas, Texas
July 14, 1998