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

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4515

To promote natural gas production from the abundant natural gas hydrate 

resources on the outer Continental Shelf and Federal lands in Alaska 

by providing royalty incentives, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 4, 2004

Mr. POMBO introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Resources 

A BILL

To promote natural gas production from the abundant natural gas hydrate resources on the outer Continental Shelf 

and Federal lands in Alaska by providing royalty incentives, 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,

3 SECTION 1. GAS HYDRATE PRODUCTION INCENTIVE. 

4 (a) PURPOSE.—The purpose of this section is to pro5 mote natural gas production from the abundant natural 

6 gas hydrate resources on the outer Continental Shelf and 

7 Federal lands in Alaska by providing royalty incentives. 

8 (b) SUSPENSION OF ROYALTIES.—
2

•HR 4515 IH 

1 (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Inte2 rior shall grant royalty relief for natural gas pro3 duced from gas hydrate resources under any lease 

4 issued under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act 

5 (43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.), and under any oil and gas 

6 lease issued for onshore Federal lands in Alaska, if 

7 the lease (eligible lease) is issued prior to January 

8 1, 2016, and production of natural gas from the gas 

9 hydrate resources commences prior to January 1, 

10 2018. 

11 (2) AMOUNT OF RELIEF.—The Secretary shall 

12 grant royalty relief to an eligible lease as a suspen13 sion volume of at least 50 billion cubic feet of nat14 ural gas produced from gas hydrate resources per 

15 nine square mile leased tract, in addition to any 

16 other royalty relief provisions applicable to the eligi17 ble lease not specifically granting a gas hydrate pro18 duction incentive. The minimum suspension volume 

19 for leased tracts that are smaller or larger than nine 

20 square miles shall be adjusted on a proportional 

21 basis. For purposes of this section, the term ‘‘gas 

22 hydrate resources’’ includes both the natural gas 

23 content of the gas hydrates within the hydrate sta24 bility zone and the free natural gas trapped by and 

25 beneath the hydrate stability zone. 
3

•HR 4515 IH 

1 (c) APPLICATION TO EXISTING LEASES.—Any relief 

2 granted under the authority of this section shall fully 

3 apply to leases in existence on the date of the enactment 

4 of this Act. 

5 (d) RULEMAKINGS.—The Secretary shall complete 

6 any rulemakings implementing this section within 365 

7 days of the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
#### Marial Avery *v.*Josiah Carter.

Executors and Administrators — Assets—Soldier’s Bounty or Back Pay.

Under Act of Congress providing for the raising of troops for the .civil war,, in case of a soldier’s death in the service, all bounties or arrearages of pay and allowances due at the time of his death pass to the widow, if any; if not, to his children; if no children, then to his heirs at law, and not to his personal representative.

APPEAL PROM CLINTON CIRCUIT COURT.

November 15, 1873.

*308
      *Winfrey, Carr, for appellant.*

*Butler, B'rewt, for appellee.*

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay:

This court has never held that it could not reverse a judgment for the want of a bill of exceptions when the pleadings of the successful party showed that he was not entitled to the relief claimed. Whatever may have been the law prior to. the late civil war, the acts of Congress under which troops' were raised for its preservation, without exception, provide, in case of a soldier’s death in the service, all bounty, arrearages of pay and allowances due the soldier at the time of his death, shall be paid to his widow, if one; if not to his .children; if none, then to. his heirs at law. In no state of case can either bounty, back pay, or allowances be claimed by the personal representative.

See Act July 24, 1861, 12 Statutes, at Large 270; Act July 11, 1862, W. 535; Act July 4, 1864, 13 Statutes, at Large 379; and Act of March 3, 1865, W. 487.

Petition overruled.
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.6
 
                          CONSENT OF FINANCIAL ADVISOR
                                       TO
                         SPECIAL TRANSACTION COMMITTEE
 
     We consent to the inclusion in this Registration Statement on Form S-4, and
all amendments thereto, of Remington Oil & Gas Corporation of our opinion dated
June 22, 1998 included within the Registration Statement as Attachment II to the
Prospectus and Proxy Statement therein (the "Opinion"), and to the references to
our firm and to the Opinion under the captions "Summary -- The Special
Transaction Committee and Opinion of Outside Financial Advisor," "The
Transaction -- Potential Conflicts of Interests," "The
Transaction -- Proceedings of the STC," and "Opinion of STC Financial Advisor"
in said Prospectus and Proxy Statement.
 
                                            HOWARD, WEIL, LABOUISSE,
                                            FRIEDRICHS, INCORPORATED
 
   
Houston, Texas
October 14, 1998
Exhibit 24

United States
Securities and Exchange Commission
Washington, D.C. 20549

Re:
    
    ALLTEL Corporation
Commission File No. 1-4996
1934 Act Filings on Form 10-K
Authorized Representatives


Gentlemen:

The above Company is the issuer of securities registered under Section 12 of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (The Act). Each of the persons signing his name below confirms, as of the
date appearing opposite his signature, that each of the Authorized Representatives named below is
authorized on his behalf to sign and submit to the Securities and Exchange Commission such filings
on Form 10-K as are required by the Act. Each person so signing also confirms the authority of
each of the Authorized Representatives to do and perform on his behalf, any and all acts and things
requisite or necessary to assure compliance by the signing person with the Form 10-K requirements.
The authority confirmed herein shall remain in effect as to each person signing his name below
until such time as the Commission shall receive from such person a written communication
terminating or modifying the authority. Each person signing his name below expressly revokes all
authority heretofore given or executed by him with respect to such filings under the Act.

Authorized Representatives

Scott T. Ford
Francis X. Frantz
Jeffery R. Gardner

Date

/s/ William H. Crown                                                  02/03/05
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert S. GAEBLER, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 00-10196.

D.C. No. CR-98-00087-MMC.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 14, 2001.*

Decided May 30, 2001.

Before PREGERSON, FERNANDEZ, and WARD LAW, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Robert Gaebler appeals pro se his conviction, following a bench trial before a magistrate judge, for assault and disorderly conduct in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 113(a)(4) and 36 C.F.R. § 2.34(a)(2). The district court had jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3231. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Gaebler contends that there is insufficient evidence to sustain his conviction and that his counsel was ineffective for failing to make evidentiary objections and to submit a rock found at the scene for blood analysis. Because Gaebler failed to renew a motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of trial, we review the sufficiency of the evidence only for plain error or to prevent a manifest miscarriage of justice. *United States v. Alvarez-Valenzuela,*231 F.3d 1198, 1200-01 (9th Cir.2000). We have carefully reviewed the record and determine that the evidence is sufficient to support the decision.

We generally do not hear cases of ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal, *see United States v. Gaither,*245 F.3d 1064, 1069 (9th Cir.2001), and there is no reason to diverge from this practice here.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the *580courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                           2,021
<SECURITIES>                                     7,734
<RECEIVABLES>                                      965
<ALLOWANCES>                                       667
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         481,176
<DEPRECIATION>                                   9,199
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 596,412
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        384,096
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            1,668
<PREFERRED>                                      6,102
<COMMON>                                           135
<OTHER-SE>                                      58,316
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   596,412
<SALES>                                         21,344
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                45,098
<CGS>                                           18,329
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   34,192
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              35,676
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,101
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,101
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,101
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .14
        

</TABLE>
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflict: AIDS and AIDS Related Research.                    

*Date:*                         December 16, 2014.                    

*Time:*                         1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Robert Freund, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5216, MSC 7852, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1050,                         *freundr@csr.nih.gov*.                    

This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: November 26, 2014.

David Clary,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2014-28392 Filed 12-1-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
<PAGE>
                                                                     EXHBIT 10.3

                               AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO
                           EMPLOYEE MATTERS AGREEMENT


THIS AMENDMENT NO. 1 to the Employee Matters Agreement ("Amendment") is entered
into this 13th day of January, 2005 between Mindspeed Technologies, Inc., a
Delaware corporation, having a principal place of business at 4000 MacArthur
Blvd. East Tower, Newport Beach, California 92660 ("Mindspeed"), and Conexant
Systems, Inc., a Delaware corporation, having a principal place of business at
4000 MacArthur Blvd. West Tower, Newport Beach, CA 92660 ("Conexant").

                                    PURPOSES

     A.   Conexant and Mindspeed (the "Parties") entered into an Employee
          Matters Agreement on June 27, 2003.

     B.   The Parties have agreed to extend a portion of that Agreement for
          employees of both companies by amending the Agreement.

                                    AGREEMENT

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the mutual covenants
contained herein and other good and valuable consideration, the Parties hereby
agree as follows:

          1.   In Sections 2.01(c), 2.02(a) and 2.02(b) replace the terms "18
               months after the Time of Distribution" with the date "June 30,
               2005." The Parties also agree to meet by June 15, 2005 to discuss
               a potential 6-month extension of this date.

Except as specifically modified by this Amendment, all terms and conditions of
the Agreement, remain unchanged, in full force and effect and constitute the
entire agreement between the Parties.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment has been executed by the duly authorized
representatives of the Parties whose signatures appear below.


MINDSPEED TECHNOLOGIES, INC.                CONEXANT SYSTEMS, INC.


BY:    /s/ Bradley W. Yates                 BY:    /s/ Michael H. Vishny
       ---------------------------------           ----------------------------
NAME:  Bradley W. Yates                     NAME:  Michael H. Vishny
TITLE: SVP & Chief Administrative Officer   TITLE: SVP, Human Resources
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 23, 2014 the National Science Foundation published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     of a permit application received. The permit was issued on December 3, 2014 to:                

Dr. Ari Friedlaender Permit No. 2015-011

Nadene G. Kennedy,

Polar Coordination Specialist, Division of Polar Programs.

[FR Doc. 2014-28794 Filed 12-8-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
108TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4618

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States PostMemorial Post Office Building’’. Nanuet, New York, as the ‘‘Anthony I. Lombardi al Service located at 10 West Prospect Street in

108TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4618

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service

located at 10 West Prospect Street in Nanuet, New

York, as the ‘‘Anthony I. Lombardi Memorial Post Office

Building’’.

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

•HR 4618 EH

1 SECTION 1. ANTHONY I. LOMBARDI MEMORIAL POST OF2 FICE BUILDING.

3 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States

4 Postal Service located at 10 West Prospect Street in

5 Nanuet, New York, shall be known and designated as the

6 ‘‘Anthony I. Lombardi Memorial Post Office Building’’.

7 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg8 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United

9 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall

10 be deemed to be a reference to the Anthony I. Lombardi

11 Memorial Post Office Building.

Passed the House of Representatives September 7,

2004.

Attest:

Clerk.
#### J. S. McClellan &c. *v.*L. D. Lyon.

Appeal — Answer to Interrogatories — Failure to Reply — Reversal.

Where answers made on -oath- to interrogatories attached to defendant’s answer, denied the existence of every material allegation of defendant’s answer, the failure of plaintiff to reply to the answer is a mere formal defect, and is not cause for reversal, the answer to the interrogatories being termed by appellant as a reply.

'APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT 'COURT.

December 11, 1872.

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay:

The answer, which appellants insist constitutes a good counter claim, does not set up a specific amount due from appellee on account of alleged losses. It does not 'ask for a settlement of the partnership accounts, so that these losses might be ascertained, and a proper judgment finally settling the rights of the parties rendered. It does not appear that it was intended that it should be regarded as anything more than a plea in bar to the suit on the note. The only specific relief asked is that appellee’s petition be dismissed. But if it be conceded that the facts set up constitute a counterclaim, the failure of appellee to reply was but a formal error in *94this case. Appellants saw proper to attach to their answer a list' of interrogatories, which were answered under oath by appellee, and these answers deny the existence of each and every material alie--gation of appellants’ answer. A formal reply, which appellants might, before the trial or at any time before the cause was submitted to the jury, have demanded, could have done nothing more. We are of opinion that these answers to the interrogatories were treated by appellants as a reply, and are not willing to disturb the judgment for a merely formal error, by which it is impossible they would have been prejudiced.

*E. Field, for appellant.*

*Gibson & Gibson, for appellee.*

The motion to have judgment on their counterclaim, for the reasons already given, was properly overruled.

Judgment *affirmed.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                           2,892
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   31,946
<ALLOWANCES>                                       814
<INVENTORY>                                      6,392
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                46,990
<PP&E>                                         223,342
<DEPRECIATION>                                 133,026
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 140,678
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           21,143
<BONDS>                                         49,907
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         8,814
<OTHER-SE>                                      44,367
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   140,678
<SALES>                                        106,150
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               106,150
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   98,340
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,882
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,928)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,441)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,487)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,487)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.28)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.28)
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

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

 

I, James W. Bernau,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of WillametteValley Vineyards, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30,2008 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such 10-Qfairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results ofoperations of Willamette Valley Vineyards Inc.

 

Date: August 14,2008

 
| By:    | /s/  James W. Bernau     |   |
|--------|--------------------------|--------|
| Name:  | James W. Bernau          |   |
| Title: | Chief  Executive Officer |   |
|        |                          |        |  |

 

----