alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>5
<LEGEND>This  schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Registrant's  audited financial  statements for the quarter ended March 31, 1999
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to those financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>0001060755
<NAME> RIDGEWOOD ELECTRIC POWER TRUST V

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                      40,812,203
<SECURITIES>                                27,081,222<F1>
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            69,651,894<F2>
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              70,314,045
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          424,395<F3>
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                  68,157,772<F4>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                70,314,045
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               727,444
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               882,187
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (156,447)<F5>
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (156,447)<F5>
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (156,447)<F5>
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (165)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (165)

<FN>
<F1>Investment  in power  project  partnership  and  limited  liability  company
accounted for on equity basis.
<F2>Includes $1,406,496 due from affiliates.
<F3>Includes $227,582 due to affiliates.
<F4>Shareholders' equity of $68,268,458 less managing share-
holders' accumulated deficit of $110,686.
<F5>After deduction of minority interest in Ridgewood WaterPure Corporation
earnings of $1,704.
</FN>


</TABLE>
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 06838

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2

File Name Description

06838\06838_ Completeness Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

06838\06838_ HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted

06838\06838_Certification Statement.pdf Plant certification statement

x 06838\06838_Checklist_110810_version34.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

x 06838\06838_Part A.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 06838\06838_PartE.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 06838\06838_PartH.xls Plant submitted survey file

06838\Supporting Documents\06838_MAP-1 Wansley Unit 9.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 06838\Supporting Documents\06838_WB-1 Wansley Unit 9.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database . 

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket.
#### The People of the State of New York v. Lena Brecht.

Motion granted. Settle order on notice.
EXHIBIT
      32.1




CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


18
      U.S.C.
      1350,


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
      connection with the annual report of Lexington Resources, Inc. (the "Company")
      on Form 10-QSB for  period ended June 30, 2006, as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Grant
      R.
      Atkins, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Vaughn Barbon, Chief
      Financial Officer of the Company, each certifies for the purpose of complying
      with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
      (the "Exchange Act") and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United
      States Code, that:





1.
      the
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Exchange Act; 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:
                August 11, 2006
            
            
            Date:
                August 11, 2006/s/ Grant
                R. Atkins
            
            
            /s/ Vaughn
                BarbonGrant
                R. Atkins
              Chief
                Executive Officer
            
            
            Vaughn
                Barbon
              Chief
                Financial Officer
1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 40836

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

STEVEN LEVON LANTZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2014 Unpublished Opinion No. 371

Filed: February 11, 2014

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED 

OPINION AND SHALL NOT 

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada

County. Hon. Thomas F. Neville, District Judge. 

Order denying I.C.R. 35 motion for reduction of sentence, affirmed.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Sally J. Cooley, Deputy 

Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney 

General, Boise, for respondent. 

________________________________________________

Before GUTIERREZ, Chief Judge; GRATTON, Judge;

and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM

Steven Levon Lantz pled guilty to robbery. I.C. § 18-6501, 18-6502, 18-204. In 

exchange for his guilty plea, the state agreed not to pursue an allegation that Lantz was a 

persistent violator. The district court sentenced Lantz to a unified term of twenty years, with a 

minimum period of confinement of seven years, but retained jurisdiction and sent Lantz to 

participate in the rider program. Following completion of his rider, the district court relinquished 

jurisdiction, but reduced Lantz’s sentence to a unified term of twenty years, with a minimum 

period of confinement of six years. Lantz filed an I.C.R 35 motion for reduction of his modified 

sentence, which the district court denied. Lantz appeals.

A motion for reduction of sentence under I.C.R. 35 is essentially a plea for leniency, 

addressed to the sound discretion of the court. State v. Knighton, 143 Idaho 318, 319, 144 P.3d 
2

23, 24 (2006); State v. Allbee, 115 Idaho 845, 846, 771 P.2d 66, 67 (Ct. App. 1989). In 

presenting a Rule 35 motion, the defendant must show that the sentence is excessive in light of 

new or additional information subsequently provided to the district court in support of the 

motion. State v. Huffman, 144 Idaho 201, 203, 159 P.3d 838, 840 (2007). An appeal from the 

denial of a Rule 35 motion cannot be used as a vehicle to review the underlying sentence absent 

the presentation of new information. Id. Because no new or additional information in support of 

Lantz’s Rule 35 motion was presented, the district court did not abuse its discretion. Therefore, 

the district court’s order denying Lantz’s Rule 35 motion is affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 915 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 915

 To authorize a cost of living adjustment in the pay of administrative 
                              law judges.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 2, 1999

Mr. Gekas (for himself, Mr. Gilman, Mr. Davis of Virginia, Mr. Filner, 
 Mr. Wolf, and Mrs. Morella) introduced the following bill; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To authorize a cost of living adjustment in the pay of administrative 
                              law judges.

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

SECTION 1. PAY OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES.

    Section 5372(b) of title 5, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``(A)'' after ``(1)'' 
        and by striking the second sentence and inserting the 
        following:
    ``(B) Within level AL-3, there shall be 6 rates of basic pay, 
designated as AL-3, rates A through F, respectively. Level AL-2 and 
level AL-1 shall each have 1 rate of basic pay.
    ``(C) The rate of basic pay for AL-3, rate A, may not be less than 
65 percent of the rate of basic pay for level IV of the Executive 
Schedule, and the rate of basic pay for AL-1 may not exceed the rate 
for level IV of the Executive Schedule.'';
            (2) in paragraph (3)(A), by striking ``upon'' each time it 
        appears and inserting ``at the beginning of the next pay period 
        following''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following:
    ``(4) Subject to paragraph (1), effective at the beginning of the 
first applicable pay period commencing on or after the first day of the 
month in which an adjustment takes effect under section 5303 in the 
rates of basic pay under the General Schedule, each rate of basic pay 
for administrative law judges shall be adjusted by an amount determined 
by the President to be appropriate.''
                                 <all>
```
#### § 1000.409 Does the Prompt Payment Act (31 U.S.C. 3901) apply to a non-BIA, non-Indian program AFA?

Yes, upon mutual agreement of the parties, an AFA may incorporate the Prompt Payment Act.
EXHIBIT 32



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 of INTERACTIVE MULTIMEDIA NETWORK, INC. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Richard J. Verdiramo, Chief Executive 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 to the best of my knowledge:



(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 result of operations of the Company.





Date:  November 12, 2003





By: /s/ Richard J. Verdiramo

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

Richard J. Verdiramo, President and CEO
EXHIBIT 12.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Paul Wogan, certify that:

|  
|--
|1.
|  
|2.
|  
|3.
|  
|4.

|   
|---
|(a)
|   
|(b)
|   
|(c)
|   
|(d)

|  
|--
|5.

|   
|---
|(a)
|   
|(b)

|    |  |                                     
|--- |  | ------------------------------------
|    |  | Dated: March 28, 2013               
|By: |  | /s/ Paul Wogan                      
|    |  | Name: Paul Wogan                    
|    |  | Title: Chief Executive
      Officer



---
#### Louisa De Agramonte, Respondent, *v.*The City of Mount Vernon, Appellant.

Second Department,

January 10, 1908.

Municipal corporation —negligence—injury by fireworks— question for jury.

It is for the jury to say whether it was negligent for a city to authorize a display of fireworks in a park at a point about 210 feet or less from a street on which ■ the plaintiff, a passer-by, was injured by the premature explosion of a bomb.

Appeal by the defendant, The City of Mount Yernon, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Westchester on the 31st day of May, 1907, upon the verdict of a jury for $5,500, and also from an order entered in said- clerk’s office on the 4th day of June, 1907, denying the defendant’s motion for a new tried made upon the minutes.

*718
      *J. Mortimer Bell,*for the appellant.

*Terence J. McManus [Abraham Gruber*with him on the brief], for the respondent.

Gaynor, J.:

We reversed a former judgment for the plaintiff (112 App. Div. 291). This time the case went to the jury on the question whether it was not negligence in the city to allow the-display of the fireworks . in the public park so close to the street where the plaintiff was hit by the fragment of the steel pipe of a bomb which prematurely exploded. She was not a spectator of the exhibition, which Was given by a private .society under a license from the mayor authorized by an ordinance of the common council, and under the superintendence of police officers sent; there, for that purpose, but a passer by. The oral evidence is surprisingly meagre in respect of the distance of the spot where, the fireworks were set and exploded from the street, which was the pivotal point -of the ’ case. But it was somewhere about the middle of the park; and by dint of scrutinizing a poor map of the'park which got in evidence, it is. found to be 450 feet long on the side where the plaintiff was, about 350 feet on the opposite.side, and about 420 feet the other way. It thus appears that the said spot was about 210 feet or less from the' plaintiff. This made the case one of fact for the jury, *i. e.,*whether the spot was so close to the street as to make the exhibition dangerous to persons thereon *(Walker*v. *City of New York, 107*App. Div. 351).

The judgment and order should be affirmed,

Present—Woodward, Jerks, Hooker, Gayror and Miller^ JJ.

Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 19-0704

JACOB SMITH,

Petitioner and Appellant,

v.

STATE OF MONTANA,

Respondent and Appellee.

Appellant Jacob Smith has filed a motion for a 60-day

which to file his reply brief.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that motion is GRANTED

shall be filed on or before June 18, 2021.

No further extensions will be granted.

DATED this 13 day of April, 2021.

For the Court,

ORDER

extension of time within

. Appellant's reply brief

Chief Justice

04/15/2021
# C_2013312DE.01003001.xml

| 26.10.2013 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | C 312/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.10.2013

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

C 312/30

---

Berichtigung der ausführlichen Leitlinien zu den verschiedenen Kategorien von Änderungen, zur Handhabung der in den Kapiteln II, IIa, III und IV der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1234/2008 der Kommission vom 24. November 2008 über die Prüfung von Änderungen der Zulassungen von Human- und Tierarzneimitteln festgelegten Verfahren und zu den gemäß diesen Verfahren einzureichenden Unterlagen

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union C 223 vom 2. August 2013
  )

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union C 223 vom 2. August 2013

2013/C 312/16

Seite 43, Anhang, Punkt B.II.b.3, Untertitel „Bedingungen“, Nummer 2:

anstatt:

| „2. | Entweder betrifft die Änderung eine feste Darreichungsform zum Einnehmen oder eine Lösung zum Einnehmen mit sofortiger Wirkstofffreisetzung, und das betreffende Arzneimittel ist ein biologisches/immunologisches oder pflanzliches Arzneimittel, ...“ |
| --- | --- |

„2.

Entweder betrifft die Änderung eine feste Darreichungsform zum Einnehmen oder eine Lösung zum Einnehmen mit sofortiger Wirkstofffreisetzung, und das betreffende Arzneimittel ist ein biologisches/immunologisches oder pflanzliches Arzneimittel, ...“

muss es heißen:

| „2. | Entweder betrifft die Änderung eine feste Darreichungsform zum Einnehmen oder eine Lösung zum Einnehmen mit sofortiger Wirkstofffreisetzung, und das betreffende Arzneimittel ist kein biologisches/immunologisches oder pflanzliches Arzneimittel, ...“. |
| --- | --- |

„2.

Entweder betrifft die Änderung eine feste Darreichungsform zum Einnehmen oder eine Lösung zum Einnehmen mit sofortiger Wirkstofffreisetzung, und das betreffende Arzneimittel ist kein biologisches/immunologisches oder pflanzliches Arzneimittel, ...“.

---
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access to publicationsin the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging and locatorservices, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications (CGP). Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event that publicationsare no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Bear River Migratory BirdRefuge, hunting and fishing regulations**
 
2006 | 2011 | 2014
 
SuDoc:I 49.44/2:B 38/18/
Item Number:0612-C (online)
CGP systemNumber:001011422
 
November 27, 2017
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-50910 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus RAUL GARCIA, also known as Richard Losoya, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. A-96-CR-48-03-SS

-------------------- June 13, 2000 Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Robert Fiedler, the attorney appointed to represent Raul Garcia, has moved to withdraw and filed a brief as required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Although Garcia has been informed of counsel’s motion, he has not filed a response. Our review of counsel’s brief and independent review of the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED. Counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2.
#### § 115.414 What is an authorized disbursement request?

An authorized disbursement request is the form or letter that must be approved by the BIA that specifies the funds to be disbursed from an IIM account. The authorized disbursement request may not be issued to disburse funds from a minor's supervised account unless an approved distribution plan exists, the amount to be disbursed is in conformity with the distribution plan and the disbursement will be made to an individual or third party specified in the plan.
IV

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 115

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that a postage stamp

should be issued recognizing the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United

States.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 16, 1999

Mr. HILL of Indiana (for himself, Mr. CONDIT, Mr. REYES, Mr. SHOWS, Mr.

MCGOVERN, Mr. LATOURETTE, Mr. HOLDEN, Ms. DANNER, Mr. ENGEL,

Mr. PAYNE, Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts, Mr. LEACH, Mr. DINGELL,

Mr. BALDACCI, Ms. DELAURO, Mr. MALONEY of Connecticut, Mr. MEEHAN, Mr. LAHOOD, Mr. BERMAN, Mr. FILNER, Ms. CARSON, Mr.

SPRATT, Mr. CLEMENT, Mr. FROST, Ms. KILPATRICK, and Mr. GUTIERREZ) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Government Reform

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that

a postage stamp should be issued recognizing the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States.

Whereas the Nation owes a deep debt to all those who have

served our country as members of the Armed Services;

Whereas the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States

has represented the Nation’s veterans for the past 100

years; and
2

•HRES 115 IH

Whereas 1999 is the 100th anniversary of the organization

of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States:

Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that—

3 (1) the United States Postal Service should

4 issue a postage stamp commemorating the 100th an5 niversary of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the

6 United States; and

7 (2) the Citizens’ Stamp Advisory Committee

8 should recommend to the Postmaster General that

9 such a postage stamp be issued.

Æ
#### Ira A. Palmer *v.*William S. Weir *et al.*

New *Trial—verdict against the evidence.*Where the evidence was contradictory the court refused to set aside the verdict as clearly against its weight.

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Warren county; the Hon. Arthur A. Smith, Judge, presiding. •

Messrs. Stewart & Phelps, tor the appellant.

Mr. James Strain, for the appellees.

Mr. Justice Lawrence

delivered the opinion of the Court:

•85-111

This was an action for the value of materials furnished and labor performed by the plaintiffs for the defendant. The jury found a verdict for the plaintiffs for $540, which the appellant insists is too large. We have carefully examined the evidence, and find it altogether too uncertain and contradictory to justify us in setting aside the verdict as clearly against its weight. The parties were all sworn, and it belonged to the jury to weigh this conflicting testimony. There is no question of law presented by the record, and it would answer no good purpose to review the evidence.

*Judgment affirmed.*
# C_2013177EN.01000301.xml

| 22.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 177/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 177/3

---

Commission communication pursuant to Article 17(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community

Invitation to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations

2013/C 177/03

| Member State | Finland |
| --- | --- |
| Concerned route | Helsinki–Varkaus route |
| Period of validity of the contract | 1 January 2014-31 December 2015 |
| Deadline for submission of tenders | 61 days after the day of publication of the notice of PSO |
| Address where the text of the invitation to tender and any relevant information and/or documentation related to the public tender and the public service obligation can be obtained free of charge | Ministry of Transport and Communications |
| Kirjaamo |
| PB 31 |
| FI-00023 Valtioneuvosto, Helsinki |
| SUOMI/FINLAND |
| Tel. +358 295342001 |
| Fax +358 916028596 |
| E-mail: kirjaamo@lvm.fi |
| Internet: http://www.lvm.fi |

Member State

Finland

Concerned route

Helsinki–Varkaus route

Period of validity of the contract

1 January 2014-31 December 2015

Deadline for submission of tenders

61 days after the day of publication of the notice of PSO

Address where the text of the invitation to tender and any relevant information and/or documentation related to the public tender and the public service obligation can be obtained free of charge

Ministry of Transport and Communications

Kirjaamo

PB 31

FI-00023 Valtioneuvosto, Helsinki

SUOMI/FINLAND

Tel. +358 295342001

Fax +358 916028596

E-mail: kirjaamo@lvm.fi

Internet: http://www.lvm.fi

---