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.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

                        An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Joint Committee will be conducted. The                               ( print page 42726)                            Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.                    

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Wednesday, October 25, 2017.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Gretchen Swayzer at 1-888-912-1227 or 469-801-0769.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Joint Committee will be held Wednesday, October 25, 2017, at 1:00 p.m. Eastern Time via teleconference. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit written statements for consideration. For more information please contact: Gretchen Swayzer at 1-888-912-1227 or 469-801-0769, TAP Office, 4050 Alpha Rd, Farmers Branch, TX 75244, or contact us at the Web site:                     *http://www.improveirs.org.*

The agenda will include various committee issues for submission to the IRS and other TAP related topics. Public input is welcomed.

Dated: September 1, 2017.

Antoinette Ross,

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. 2017-19195 Filed 9-8-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
III 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 288 

Commemorating October 22, 2015, as the 50th anniversary of the enactment 

of the Highway Beautification Act of 1965. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 19, 2015 

Mr. ALEXANDER (for himself and Mr. UDALL) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Environment and Public 

Works 

RESOLUTION 

Commemorating October 22, 2015, as the 50th anniversary 

of the enactment of the Highway Beautification Act of 1965. 

Whereas, on October 22, 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson 

signed the Highway Beautification Act of 1965 (Public 

Law 89–285; 79 Stat. 1028), also known as ‘‘Lady 

Bird’s Bill’’, ‘‘to protect the public investment in [public] 

highways, to promote the safety and recreational value of 

public travel, and to preserve natural beauty’’; 

Whereas, earlier in 1965, President Johnson convened a 

White House Conference on Natural Beauty that recommended, among other things, certain highway beautification actions; 

Whereas, at the signing of the Highway Beautification Act of 

1965 (Public Law 89–285; 79 Stat. 1028), President 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 288 IS 

Johnson stated: ‘‘This bill does not represent everything 

that we wanted. It does not represent what we need. It 

does not represent what the national interest requires. 

But it is a first step, and there will be other steps. For 

though we must crawl before we walk, we are going to 

walk.’’; 

Whereas, since inception, the National Highway System has 

expanded to, as of October 2015, over 220,000 miles 

stretching across the United States; and 

Whereas the national vision led by President Johnson and 

Lady Bird Johnson for a more beautiful highway system 

should be remembered and renewed: Now, therefore, be 

it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) recognizes the legacy and vision of Presi3 dent Lyndon B. Johnson and Lady Bird Johnson on 

4 the 50th anniversary of the enactment of the High5 way Beautification Act of 1965 (Public Law 89– 

6 285; 79 Stat. 1028); 

7 (2) commends the organizations, volunteers, 

8 and businesses that work to support the vision of a 

9 more beautiful United States; 

10 (3) recognizes that beautiful highways and sce11 nic byways— 

12 (A) promote— 

13 (i) economic development; and 

14 (ii) national and international tour15 ism; and 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•SRES 288 IS 

1 (B) reflect the best of the United States; 

2 and 

3 (4) renews the previous commitment of the Sen4 ate to— 

5 (A) protect the public investment in public 

6 highways; 

7 (B) promote the safety and recreational 

8 value of public travel; and 

9 (C) preserve the natural beauty of the 

10 United States. 

Æ 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### Oglesby and another *v.*Sillom and Husband.

*(Circuit Court, E. D. Louisiana.*

July, 1881.)

1. Domicile — Citation.

By the laws of Louisiana the domicile of the wife follows that of the husband. Therefore, a citation for the wife, left at the domicile of the husband, in this state is good, and is binding on her.

In Equity.

*Mott é Kelly,*for plaintiffs.

*Hudson é Fearn,*for defendants.

Billings, D. J.

This suit is instituted to foreclose a mortgage executed by a married woman upon her property. The first question is as to the validity of the service of the subpoena. The service was made at the domicile of the husband, there being no legal separation. This is a valid service upon the wife, according to the rules in equity of the supreme court, and according to our Code of Practice. The rule 'of the supreme court undoubtedly refers the question of domicile to the laws of the state, and the separation in fact does not prevent the husband’s domicile being that of the wife. The service is, therefore, legal, and Mrs. Sillom is properly called upon to answer. In fact, this defendant, who is a married woman, has lived in France for the past 17 years, although the legal domicile of her husband, and consequently that of herself, is within this state. Though the service is legal and brings her before the court, the time which should be allowed her to consider in a cause should be determined by her actual residence, and should be sufficient to enable her, as to matters of fact, to communicate with her solicitors. The question here being as to whether a receiver should be appointed to administer a plantation, and the proof being that it is well administered; and, further, it being impossible that any crop can be taken from the plantation until late in the autumn, — there is little risk of damage to *861tlie complainants in allowing reasonable delay for the purpose of suitable preparation on the part of the.real defendant, whose interests are distinct from those of her husband.

It is therefore ordered that the hearing of the application for the appointment of a receiver, be continued to the third Monday of November.
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

             STATEMENT OF COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS (LOSS) PER SHARE

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                     THREE MONTHS ENDED             NINE MONTHS ENDED
                                                        SEPTEMBER 30,                 SEPTEMBER 30,
                                                ------------------------------    ---------------------------
                                                   1996             1997              1996            1997
                                                -------------   -------------      ----------    ------------
                                                                                  
<S>                                             <C>               <C>              <C>              <C>
Net loss                                          $(1,609,000)    $(2,321,000)    $(3,076,000)    $(7,288,000)
                                                =============   =============    ============    ============
Shares:                                                                                           
   Weighted average number of shares                                                              
    Outstanding                                     3,243,391       6,283,082       3,243,391       4,935,820
   Dilutive effect of options to be
    issued (1)                                        365,820         242,800         365,820         336,532
                                                -------------   -------------    ------------    ------------
   Total shares used in computing net                                                             
    loss per share                                  3,609,211       6,525,882       3,609,211       5,272,352
                                                =============   =============    ============    ============
                                                                                                  
Net loss per share (primary & fully dilutive)     $      (.45)    $      (.36)    $      (.85)    $     (1.38)
                                                =============   =============    ============    ============
</TABLE>



(1) Reflects the shares of Common Stock issuable to employees related to
    exercisable options that are outstanding under the Equity Appreciation Plan,
    less shares assumed to be repurchased using the treasury stock method.
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 176 (Wednesday, September 13, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 43033]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-19372]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4332-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001]


Texas; Amendment No. 3 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of Texas (FEMA-4332-DR), dated August 25, 2017, and 
related determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued September 1, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and 
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of Texas is hereby amended to include the following areas 
among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the 
event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of 
August 25, 2017.

    Polk, Tyler, and Walker Counties for Individual Assistance and 
assistance for debris removal and emergency protective measures 
[Categories A and B], including direct federal assistance, under the 
Public Assistance program.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, 
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis 
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster 
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance 
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and 
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, 
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing 
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially 
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other 
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially 
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Brock Long,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2017-19372 Filed 9-12-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
EXHIBIT
32.2



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



In
connection with the Quarterly Report (the "Report") of Digerati Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-Q for the period ending April 30, 2017, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Antonio
Estrada Jr., the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,



|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
in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
|-- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|By | /s/
    Antonio Estrada Jr. | 
|-- | --------------------------- | 
|   | Antonio Estrada
    Jr.     | 
|   | Chief Financial
    Officer | 
|   | June 2, 2017                |
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 Economic Development Administration
 AGENCY: Economic Development Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.
 ACTION: Notice and opportunity for public comment.
 SUMMARY: The Economic Development Administration (EDA) has received petitions for certification of eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance from the firms listed below. Accordingly, EDA has initiated investigations to determine whether increased imports into the United States of articles like or directly competitive with those produced by each of these firms contributed importantly to the total or partial separation of the firm's workers, or threat thereof, and to a decrease in sales or production of each petitioning firm.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  List of Petitions Received by EDA for Certification Eligibility To Apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance
[9/1/2017 through 9/8/2017]
Firm name
Firm address
Date
                             accepted for 
                             investigation
Product(s)RCM Industries, Inc
3021 Cullerton Drive, Franklin Park, IL
9/5/2017
The firm manufactures aluminum die castings.Southern Heat Exchanger Corporation
6100 Old Montgomery Highway, Tuscaloosa, AL
9/6/2017
The firm manufactures power boilers and heat exchangers.
 Any party having a substantial interest in these proceedings may request a public hearing on the matter. A written request for a hearing must be submitted to the Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms Division, Room 71030, Economic Development Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC 20230, no later than ten (10) calendar days following publication of this notice. These petitions are received pursuant to section 251 of the Trade Act 1974, as amended. Please follow the requirements set forth in EDA's regulations at 13 CFR 315.9 for procedures to request a public hearing. The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance official number and title for the program under which these petitions are submitted is 11.313, Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms. Irette Patterson Program Analyst.


[FR Doc. 2017-19661 Filed 9-14-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-WH-P
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Corporate Trust Services**

  MAC R1204-010  9062 Old Annapolis Road  Columbia, MD 21045  Tel: 410 884 2000  Fax: 410 715 2380 |
|--------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

Re:         Annual Statement of Compliance for Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities,Inc., Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2013-C14

  

Per the Pooling and ServicingAgreement dated as of June 1, 2013 (the "Agreement"), theundersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., asCertificate Administrator ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies asfollows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2016 (the "ReportingPeriod"):

 

(a)    A review of Wells Fargo's activitiesduring the Reporting Period and of its performance under the Agreement has beenmade under such officer's supervision; and

 

(b)   To the best of such officer's knowledge,based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of its obligations underthe Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

February 27, 2017

 

 

/s/Brian Smith

BRIAN SMITH

Vice President 

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll  go far |
|------------------------|-------------------------------------|
Filed 11/9/10 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2010 ND 209

Mitchell David Holbach, Petitioner and Appellant

v.

State of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee

Nos. 20100141 & 20100142

State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee 

v.

Mitchell David Holbach, Defendant and Appellant

Nos. 20100143 & 20100145 & 201000146

City of Minot, Plaintiff and Appellee

v.

Mitchell David Holbach, Defendant and Appellant 

No. 20100144

Appeal from the District Court of Ward County, Northwest Judicial District, the Honorable Lee A. Christofferson, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Travis Wayne Finck, 314 East Thayer Avenue, Suite 200, Bismarck, N.D. 58504, for petitioner, defendant and appellant Mitchell David Holbach.

Rozanna Christine Larson, P.O. Box 5005, Minot, N.D. 58702-5005, for respondent, plaintiff and appellee State of North Dakota.

John P. Van Grinsven III, City Prosecutor, 515 2nd Avenue Southwest, Minot, N.D. 58701, for plaintiff and appellee City of Minot.

Mitchell David Holbach, defendant and appellant; no appearance.

Holbach v. State

Nos. 20100141 - 20100146

Per Curiam.

[¶1]Mitchell Holbach appeals from a district court order denying his application for post-conviction relief, an order on his request for return of personal property, and an order denying his motion to amend the judgment and probation conditions.  Holbach argues the district court improperly denied his application for post- conviction relief because his counsel was ineffective and the State unconstitutionally failed to disclose exculpatory videotape evidence.  He also contends the court abused its discretion by quashing his subpoenas for the post-conviction evidentiary hearing, the court erred by denying his motion to amend the criminal judgment and probation conditions because the conditions of his probation are unconstitutionally vague, and the court erred in finding his personal property had been returned.  We conclude the court’s findings of fact are not clearly erroneous and the court did not abuse its discretion by quashing Holbach’s subpoenas or denying his motion to amend the judgment and probation conditions.  We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).  

[¶2]Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Mary Muehlen Maring

Daniel J. Crothers

Dale V. Sandstrom

Carol Ronning Kapsner
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2398 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2398

  To amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to clarify the 
     circumstances under which the enhanced penalty provisions for 
                     subsequent convictions apply.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 24, 2011

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to clarify the 
     circumstances under which the enhanced penalty provisions for 
                     subsequent convictions apply.

    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 ``Firearm Recidivist Sentencing Act of 
2011''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO ENHANCED PENALTIES PROVISIONS.

    Section 924(c) of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1)(C), by striking ``In the case of a 
        second or subsequent conviction under this subsection'' and 
        inserting ``If a person is convicted under this subsection 
        after a prior conviction under this subsection has become 
        final''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(6) The provisions of section 411 of the Controlled 
        Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 851), other than subsections (a)(2) 
        and (e) of such section, as in effect on the date of the 
        enactment of this paragraph, shall apply to sentencing for 
        convictions under this subsection in the same manner in which 
        such provisions apply to sentencing for offenses under part D 
        of title II of such Act.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### In the Matter of Jonathan Odom, Appellant, v Donald Selsky, as Director of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, Respondent.

Submitted January 7, 2008;

decided February 12, 2008

On the Court’s own motion, appeal dismissed, without costs, upon the ground that the order appealed from does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution. Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution.
This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before

publication in the New York Reports.

----------------------------------------------------------------- No. 51 SSM 2 In the Matter of Norman Woods et al., Respondents, v. State University of New York et al., Appellants.

Submitted by Julie M. Sheridan, for appellants. Submitted by Thomas D. Latin, for respondents.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules, order reversed, without costs, for the reasons stated in the dissenting memorandum of Justice Robert Rose (139 AD3d 1322, 1325), and matter remitted to the Appellate Division, Third Department, for consideration of issues raised but not determined on the appeal to that court. Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Rivera, Abdus-Salaam, Stein, Fahey and Garcia concur. Judge Wilson took no part.
Decided February 14, 2017