alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect To The Actions and Policies of Certain Members of the Government of Belarus and Other Persons that Undermine Democratic Processes or Institutions in Belarus

On June 16, 2006, by Executive Order 13405, the President declared a national emergency and ordered related measures blocking the property of certain persons undermining democratic processes or institutions in Belarus, pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701-1706). The President took this action to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States constituted by the actions and policies of certain members of the Government of Belarus and other persons that have undermined democratic processes or institutions; committed human rights abuses related to political repression, including detentions and disappearances; and engaged in public corruption, including by diverting or misusing Belarusian public assets or by misusing public authority.

Despite some positive developments in the past year, including the release of internationally recognized political prisoners, the actions and policies of certain members of the Government of Belarus and other persons continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States. Accordingly, the national emergency declared on June 16, 2006, and the measures adopted on that date to deal with that emergency, must continue in effect beyond June 16, 2009. Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13405.

                        This notice shall be published in the                         *Federal Register*                         and transmitted to the Congress.                    

[FR Doc. E9-14214

Billing code 3195-W9-P
#### SYNEK v. McCarthy et al.

Civ. 45-726.

United States District Court S. D. New York.

July 23, 1948.

Barnett L. Kulak, of New York City, for plaintiff.

C. P. Goepel, of New York City, for defendants.

BONDY, District Judge.

Plaintiff moves, pursuant to Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. for an order directing the defendants to produce and to give to plaintiff and his attorneys an inspection of “the process which the defendants have been using and still use in the manufacture of beads” and of “the bead making machine which the defendants have been using and still use.” From the affidavits it is not Cclear whether or not the plaintiff claims that the defendants have been, or are, using only one process and only one machine.

If a party does not have sufficient information to describe the document or object which he desires to inspect, he may submit written interrogatories to, or take the deposition of the other party to obtain such information, and on the basis thereof, apply for an order under Rule 34. See Schoenberg v. Decorative Cabinet Corporation, D.C., 27 F.Supp. 802, 803; Connecticut Importing Co. v. Continental Distilling Corporation, D.C., 1 F.R.D. 190, 193; Marzo v. Moore-McCormack Lines, D.C., 7 F.R.D. 378, 380, 381; 2 Moore’s Federal Practice 2638, 2639.

The motion accordingly is denied with leave to renew upon a sufficient designation of the object to be inspected.
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER R EINSTATING A PPEAL

Appellate case name: Ex parte Christian Charles Lee

Appellate case number: 01

- 18

- 00969

- CR

Trial court case number: 2215871

Trial court: Co unty Crim inal C our t at Law No

. 8 of Harris County

This appeal was abated for a supplemental clerk’s record containing the trial court’s signed judgment denying appellant’s pre

- trial application for writ of habeas corpus. A supplemental clerk’s record has been filed containing t he signed judgment. Accordingly, we lift the abatement ordered by this Court and reinstate the appeal on the Court’s active docket. The case will be considered by a panel consisting of Justices Lloyd, Goodman, and Hightower.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s sign ature:

____

/s/ Gordon Goodman

_________ Acting individually

Date: __ November 24, 2020

____
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 262 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 262

 Recognizing linemen, the profession of linemen, the contributions of 
  these brave men and women who protect public safety, and expressing 
  support for the designation of April 18, 2019, as National Lineman 
                           Appreciation Day.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 27, 2019

 Mr. Rouzer submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                  the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Recognizing linemen, the profession of linemen, the contributions of 
  these brave men and women who protect public safety, and expressing 
  support for the designation of April 18, 2019, as National Lineman 
                           Appreciation Day.

Whereas the profession of linemen is steeped in personal, family, and 
        professional tradition;
Whereas linemen are often first responders during storms and other catastrophic 
        events, working to make the scene safe for other public safety heroes;
Whereas linemen must work high atop powerlines 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, 
        to keep electricity flowing;
Whereas linemen play a vital role in the Nation's economy by maintaining and 
        growing the energy infrastructure of the United States;
Whereas linemen must often work under dangerous conditions separated from their 
        families to keep schools and businesses open;
Whereas linemen deserve recognition from the community regarding the danger of 
        their work; and
Whereas April 18, 2019, would be an appropriate date to designate as National 
        Lineman Appreciation Day: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) recognizes the efforts of linemen in keeping the power 
        on and protecting public safety;
            (2) supports the designation of National Lineman 
        Appreciation Day; and
            (3) recognizes linemen as first responders.
                                 <all>
```
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

May 2, 2016

d 0418 a 

# Order

Clerk May 2, 2016

151807

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 151807

COA: 325671

Kent CC: 11

- 009886

- FH

MARCUS DWANE MANNING, JR.,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 2 7, 2015 order

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of FGX International Holdings Limited (the "Company") for the
three months and nine months ended October 3, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Alec Taylor, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



November 6, 2009

/s/ ALEC TAYLORAlec Taylor Chief Executive Officer
(principal executive officer)


---



QuickLinks
Exhibit 10.23


 


 





AMENDMENT TO MANAGEMENT AND SERVICES AGREEMENT


 


 


THIS AMENDMENT TO MANAGEMENT AND SERVICES
AGREEMENT (the "Amendment") is made and entered into effective as of the 15th day of May, 2013, by and between American
Sands Energy Corp., a Delaware corporation (the "Company") and LIFE Power & Fuels, LLC (the "LIFE").


W I T N E S S E T H:


WHEREAS, the Company and LIFE entered
into a Management and Services Agreement dated as of April 1, 2012 (the “Agreement”);


Whereas, the Company and LIFE desire to amend
such Agreement as set forth herein;


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing,
the Company and the LIFE hereby mutually covenant and agree as follows:


 


		1.	Effective January 1, 2013, Section B, Compensation, is amended to read as follows:



 


		(i)	as consideration to LIFE for the services provided hereunder, the Company agrees to pay a monthly fee to LIFE of $5,000. This
amount shall be increased to $25,000 a month if Daniel Carlson ceases to be employed by the Company, effective the month following
his cessation of employment. The monthly consideration will be accrued until the Company raises a minimum of $10,000,000 in an
equity or debt offering. At the time of the closing of such offering, LIFE shall convert all outstanding amounts hereunder into
the equity or debt instruments issued by the Company in such offering. 



 


		(ii)	Any amounts currently accrued and payable to LIFE under this Agreement shall be reduced by the amount of $200,000.



 


		2.	All other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain the same.



 


 




    	 



    	 



    

 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused
this Agreement to be executed by its duly authorized officer, and the LIFE has executed this Agreement, on the date and year first
above written.


	 	"COMPANY"
	 	 
	 	American Sands Energy Corp.
	 	 
	 	 
	 	 
	 	By: /s/ William C. Gibbs
	 	William C. Gibbs, Chief Executive Officer
	 	 
	 	 
	 	 
	 	"LIFE"
	 	 
	 	 
	 	/s/ Daniel Carlson
	 	Daniel Carlson
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-13-00823-CV

WILLIAMSBURG CARE CO., LP d/b/a Princeton Place Rehabilitation and Healthcare,

Appellant

v.

Jesus Acosta, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Maria Acosta, Deceased; et 

Jesus ACOSTA, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Maria Acosta, Deceased; et 

al.,

Appellees

From the 73rd Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012-CI-16420

Honorable John D. Gabriel, Jr., Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Delivered and Filed: July 15, 2015

MOTION TO DISMISS GRANTED; APPEAL DISMISSED

On November 25, 2013, this court granted appellant’s motion to stay the underlying 

proceedings at the trial court level in trial cause number 2012-CI-16420. On March 4, 2014, this 

court granted appellant’s motion to abate this appeal because one of the issues presented in the 

appeal was the same issue pending in petitions for review filed in Williamsburg Care Co. L.P. v. 

Acosta, 406 S.W.3d 711 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2013, pet. filed), Fredericksburg Care Co. L.P. 

v. Lira, 407 S.W.3d 810 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2013, pet. filed), and Fredericksburg Care Co. 

L.P. v. Perez, 406 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2013, pet. filed). Our order stated that, 
04-13-00823-CV

- 2 -

for administrative purposes, this appeal would be treated as a closed case, unless and until appellant 

filed a motion requesting its reinstatement following the Texas Supreme Court’s resolution of the 

issue. On March 6, 2015, the Texas Supreme Court decided the issues raised in Acosta, Lira, and 

Perez. On July 1, 2015, the parties filed an “Agreed, Joint Motion to Reinstate, to Lift Stay, and 

to Dismiss Appeal.” 

The motion is GRANTED, this court’s stay of proceedings in trial cause number 2012-CI16420 is lifted, this appeal is reinstated on the docket of this court, and this appeal is dismissed.

PER CURIAM
WILLIAM N. TAYLOR, JR. M.D.
,
Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA
, Respondent. ___________________________/ IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

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

CASE NO. 1D 14

- 3316

Opinion filed September 29, 2014.

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

-- Original Jurisdiction

. William N. Taylor, Jr. M.D.
, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee , for Respondent.

P ER CURIAM.

The “Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and Motion to Discharge Court

Appointed Counsel for Negligence and Willful Misrepresentation” is treated as a

petition alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel and is DENIED on the

merits.

LEWI S, C.J., PADOVANO and CLARK, JJ.
, CONCUR.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Srisdi Kidkarndee, Appellant.

Submitted March 11, 2013;

decided March 21, 2013

Motion for an extension of the time within which to apply for permission to appeal pursuant to CPL 460.20 granted and motion papers treated as a timely CPL 460.20 application.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

PETER HALIKIAS,

 Petitioner

 v.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEAL

BOARD (COLONIAL MARBLE AND

GRANITE),

 Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 70 EAL 2015

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the

Order of the Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 15th day of July, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED.
@article{1210006,
  author = {Aidan Zabalo and Justin Wilson and Michael Gullans and Romain Vasseur and Sarang Goplakrishnan and David Huse and Jed Pixley},
  title = {Infinite-randomness criticality in monitored quantum dynamics with static disorder},
  year = {2023},
  number = {107},
  month = {2023-06-23 04:06:00},
  publisher = {Physical Review B},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=935724},
  doi = {https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.107.L220204},
  language = {en},
}
#### United States *v.*L. Huffmaster.

(No. 4,998.)

*(Circuit Court,*N. *D. California.*

May 21, 1888.)

Courts—Federal Circuit Courts—Jurisdictional Amount.

Under the act c. March 3,1887, (24 8t. at Large, 552,) the United Stat°s circuit courts have no jurisdiction of an action to recover money or property wherein the United States are plaintiffs, unless the amouut or value of the matter in controversy exceeds the sum of $2,000, exclusive of costs.

*(Syllabus by the Court.)*

*J. C.*Carey, U. S. Atty., for plaintiff.

*Wm. H. Cook,*for defendant.

Before Sawyer, Circuit Judge.

Sawyer, J.

This is an action to recover the possession of 60 cords of wood cut upon the public lauds, alleged to be of the value of $372. The suit was commenced on July 12, 1887, and it therefore falls under the provisions of the act of March 3, 1887, amendatory of the act of 1875, to determine the jurisdiction of the circuit courts of the United States, etc., (24 St. 552.) The provision of section 1, conferring jurisdiction, is, in all respects affecting the question of jurisdiction in this case, substantially the same as in the act of 1875, except that it raises the value of the matter in controversy in order to give jurisdiction from $500 to $2,000. The value of the wood sought to be recovered being much less than $2,000, the court has no jurisdiction, and, as in the preceding case, (No. 3,704,)" and for the reasons therein given, the suit must be dismissed, without prejudice, for want of jurisdiction, and it is so ordered.
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.                  

###### Nuclear Regulatory Commission

                    The                     **Federal Register**                     Notice for the ACRS meeting scheduled to be held on July 8-10, 2009, is being revised to make the following changes:                

The discussion of Draft Final Regulatory Guide 1.215, “Guidance for ITAAC Closure under 10 CFR Part 52,” scheduled between 10:15 and 11:45 a.m. on Wednesday, July 8, 2009, is now scheduled between 10:45 a.m. and 12:15 p.m. on Thursday, July 9, 2009. The discussion of Draft Final Revision 3 to Regulatory Guide 1.100, “Seismic Qualification of Electric and Mechanical Equipment for Nuclear Power Plants,” scheduled between 10:45 a.m. and 12:15 p.m. on Thursday, July 9, 2009, is now scheduled between 10:15 and 11:45 a.m. on Wednesday, July 8, 2009.

                    In addition, the topic on Applicability of TRACE Code to Analyze ESBWR                           ( print page 30175)                        Stability, scheduled between 12:45 and 2:45 p.m. on Wednesday, July 8, 2009, has been clarified to state “Applicability of TRACE Code to Evaluate New LWR Designs.”                

                    The notice of this meeting was previously published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on Wednesday, June 17, 2009 [74 FR 28727-28728]. All other items remain the same as previously published.                

Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting Girija Shukla, Cognizant ACRS staff (301-415-6855), between 7:15 a.m. and 5 p.m., (ET).

                        Dated:                        *June 18, 2009.*

Andrew L. Bates,

Advisory Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. E9-14833 Filed 6-23-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-19-00402-CV

__________________

BRIAN K. BROUSSARD, Appellant

V.

MONTGOMERY CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT, Appellee

__________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 284th District Court

Montgomery County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 18-07-09854-CV

__________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On December 10, 2019, we notified the parties that the appeal would be 

dismissed unless the appellant remitted the filing fee for the appeal. Appellant did 

not respond.

Appellant did not file an affidavit of indigence on appeal and has not shown 

that he is entitled to proceed without payment of costs. See Tex. R. App. P. 20.1. 
2

There being no satisfactory explanation for the failure to pay the filing fee for the 

appeal, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on January 15, 2020

Opinion Delivered January 16, 2020

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Johnson, JJ.
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      Exhibit 23


                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Report (Form 10-K)
of St. Paul Bancorp, Inc. of our report dated January 17, 1996 included in the
1995 Annual Report to Shareholders of St. Paul Bancorp, Inc.

We also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No. 33-11890) pertaining to the St. Paul Federal Bank For Savings
Profit Sharing and Savings Plan and the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-
60609) pertaining to the St. Paul Bancorp, Inc. 1995 Incentive Plan of our
report dated January 17, 1996, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements of St. Paul Bancorp, Inc. incorporated by reference in the Annual
Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1995.



                                             Ernst & Young LLP

March 25, 1996
Chicago, Illinois
Exhibit 23.2**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No. 333-29157,333-102383, 333-61640 and 333-108032 on Forms S-8 of our report dated March 2, 2006 on theconsolidated financial statements of Bank of Granite Corporation and its subsidiaries as ofDecember 31, 2005 and for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, before the effects of theadjustments to retrospectively reflect the 2006 5-for-4 stock split effected in the form of a stockdividend as discussed in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements of Bank of GraniteCorporation for the year ended December 31, 2006. The consolidated financial statements as ofDecember 31, 2005 and for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, before the adjustments toretrospectively reflect the 2006 5-for-4 stock split effected in the form of a stock dividend donot appear in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Bank of Granite Corporation for the year endedDecember 31, 2006.      /s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP    Charlotte, North Carolina     March 14, 2007
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of

INDEPENDENT BANCSHARES, INC.

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

(Adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002)

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Independent BancShares, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended
March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), we, Mark A. Imes, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company and Nicholas J. Panicaro, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the
periods presented in the financial statements included in such Report.
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                      |  |  |  |                         
|------------------------------------- |  |  |  | ------------------------
|/s/ Mark A. Imes                      |  |  |  | /s/ Nicholas J. Panicaro
|Mark A. Imes                          |  |  |  | Nicholas J. Panicaro    
|President and Chief Executive Officer |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer 
|                                      |  | 
|Date: May 14, 2009                    |  |  |  | Date: May 14, 2009