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

# In This Section

                      -  Studies                          -  Economic Impact Study 
                        -  Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway Study 
                        -  Infrastructure Investment Survey 
                        -  Safety Impact Study 
                        -  Social Impact Study 
                      -  Publications                          -  Seaway Compass 
                        -  Seaway System Directory 
                        -  Marketing Materials 
                      -  Reports                          -  Annual Reports 
                        -  Seaway Infrastructure Program 
                      -  Other Resources                          -  Electronic Reading Room 
                        -  National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 
                        -  GLS Federal Grants Toolkit 
                        -  Green Shipping Corridor Network (GSCN) 
                        -  GSCN Framework 
                        -  Transportation ROUTES 

# GSCN Collaborative Forum Summary Report (April 2023)

GSCN Collaborative Forum Summary Report (April 2023)_2.pdf (552.45 KB)

*DOT is committed to ensuring that information is available in appropriate alternative formats to meet the requirements of persons who have a disability. If you require an alternative version of files provided on this page, please contact					LaToya.James@dot.gov.*
EXHIBIT 10.19


                                  AMENDMENT SIX
                                     TO THE
                            MANAGED NETWORK AGREEMENT
                                     BETWEEN
                       SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, L.P.
                                       AND
                               BRIDGE DATA COMPANY

CONFIDENTIAL MATERIALS HAVE BEEN OMITTED FROM THIS EXHIBIT PURSUANT TO A REQUEST
FOR  CONFIDENTIAL  TREATMENT AND HAVE BEEN FILED  SEPARATELY WITH THE SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION. ASTERISKS DENOTE OMISSIONS.

The  Managed  Network  Agreement  ("Agreement")  between  Sprint  Communications
Company, L.P. ("Sprint") and Bridge Data Company ("Bridge"), having an effective
date of March 1, 1995, as amended, is hereby further amended as set forth below.

WHEREAS,  Sprint and Bridge have  previously  entered into an Agreement  for the
provision of managed network services; and

WHEREAS, Sprint and Bridge desire to amend the Agreement.

NOW THEREFORE, the parties mutually agree to the following:

1.       Attachment B. The following item is hereby incorporated into Attachment
         B - MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES:

         III.     CD-ROM CHARGES

                  Provides electronic format for Frame Relay Billing
                  Customer's  monthly  recurring  charge  for  receipt  of  it's
invoice on CD-ROM is *

2.       All other terms and  conditions of the  Agreement  shall remain in full
         force and effect, except as expressly stated herein.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment Five as of the date
of the last signature below.

SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS CO., L.P.              BRIDGE DATA COMPANY

/s/ George Putney                            /s/ Kevin J. Schott
----------------------------------           ----------------------------------
Signature                                    Signature


George Putney                                Kevin J. Schott
----------------------------------           ----------------------------------
Printed Name                                 Printed Name


Branch Manager                               Vice President/Controller
----------------------------------           ----------------------------------
Title                                        Title


5/23/97                                      5/23/97
----------------------------------           ----------------------------------
Date                                         Date


* CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT REQUESTED
Bridge/Sprint Confidential               -1-
#### J. L. Moore, Trustee, appellee, v. Francis M. Jacobs, appellant.

Filed March 5, 1902.

No. 11,368.

Confirmation: Appeal.

Appeal from the district court for Custer county. Heard below before Grimes, J.

*Affirmed.*

*J. R. Dean*and *J. 8. Kirkpatrick,*for appellant.

*8. B. Pound, Roscoe Pound,*and *G. L. Gutterson, contra.*

Per Curiam.

An appeal is taken by the owner of the fee title from a final order of confirmation of sale of real estate in foreclosure proceedings. None of the objections presented to the trial court as réasons why confirmation should be denied, except one, are presented or argued in brief of counsel for appellant whence such objections are to be taken and considered as .having been waived. The objections argued in the brief, save one relating to the return of the sheriff to the order of sale, which is apparently without merit, were in nowise presented to the trial court, and therefore we can not consider them on this appeal..

The order of confirmation should be, and accordingly is,

Affirmed.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Before the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS RULINGS

Release No. 6878/November 4, 2022

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING

File No. 3-20531

In the Matter of :

:

HORTER INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT, LLC, : ORDER

and DREW K. HORTER :

The Securities and Exchange Commission instituted this proceeding with an Order 

Instituting Proceedings, pursuant to Sections 203(e), 203(f), and 203(k) of the Investment Advisers 

Act of 1940, on September 8, 2021. The proceeding was stayed pursuant to 17 C.F.R. § 

201.161(c)(2) (Stay Pending Commission Consideration of Offer of Settlement) on September 23, 

2022. Horter Inv. Mgmt., LLC, Admin. Proc. Rulings Release No. 6873, 2022 SEC LEXIS 2540

(A.L.J.). On November 3, 2022, the Commission accepted Respondents’ Offer of Settlement and 

ordered continued proceedings to determine (a) what, if any, civil penalties are appropriate and in 

the public interest under Section 203(i) of the Advisers Act; and (b) what, if any, other remedial 

actions are appropriate and in the public interest under Sections 203(e) and 203(f). Horter Inv. 

Mgmt., LLC, Advisers Act Release No. 6182. The Commission ordered that these issues may be 

determined “on the basis of affidavits, declarations, excerpts of sworn deposition or investigative 

testimony, documentary evidence, expert reports, and if the [undersigned] determines it necessary, 

hearing testimony.” Id at 13.

Accordingly, the stay is lifted. The parties are ordered to confer on procedures for the 

resolution of the issues that the Commission ordered to be determined and to file a joint proposal by 

November 30, 2022. The parties are advised that hearing testimony, if any, will be taken by remote

means, in video hearing sessions.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

/S/ Carol Fox Foelak 

Carol Fox Foelak

Administrative Law Judge
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 53 (Friday, March 18, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 14949]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-6547]


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

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting Notice

TIME AND DATE: Wednesday, March 23, 2011, 10 a.m.-12 Noon.

PLACE: Hearing Room 420, Bethesda Towers, 4330 East West Highway, 
Bethesda, Maryland.

STATUS: Commission Meeting--Open to the Public.

Matter To Be Considered:
    Briefing Matter: Bed Rails--Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
    A live Webcast of the Meeting can be viewed at http://www.cpsc.gov/webcast. For a recorded message containing the latest agenda 
information, call (301) 504-7948.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Todd A. Stevenson, Office of the 
Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West 
Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, (301) 504-7923.

    Dated: March 15, 2011.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-6547 Filed 3-16-11; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
§ 5.23 Response to notice. ( a ) *Comments and reply comments.* Comments, protests, interventions, recommendations, and preliminary terms and conditions or preliminary fishway prescriptions must be filed no later than 60 days after the notice of acceptance and ready for environmental analysis. All reply comments must be filed within 105 days of that notice.
( b ) *Water quality certification.* ( 1 ) With regard to certification requirements for a license applicant under Section 401(a)(1) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act), the license applicant must file no later than 60 days following the date of issuance of the notice of acceptance and ready for environmental analysis provide for in § 5.22: ( i ) A copy of the water quality certification;
( ii ) A copy of the request for certification, including proof of the date on which the certifying agency received the request; or
( iii ) Evidence of waiver of water quality certification as described in paragraph (b)(5)(2) of this Section.
( 2 ) A certifying agency is deemed to have waived the certification requirements of section 401(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act if the certifying agency has not denied or granted certification by one year after the date the certifying agency received a written request for certification. If a certifying agency denies certification, the applicant must file a copy of the denial within 30 days after the applicant received it.
( 3 ) Notwithstanding any other provision in 18 CFR part 4, subpart B, any application to amend an existing license, and any application to amend a pending application for a license, requires a new request for water quality certification pursuant to § 4.34(b)(5) of this chapter if the amendment would have a material adverse impact on the water quality in the discharge from the project or proposed project.
Order entered January 28, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00523-CR

CRISTAL PAULLETT RICHARDSON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 6

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F13-00479-X

ORDER

The Court GRANTS the January 23, 2015 motion of Lori Ordiway to withdraw as 

appellant’s counsel. We DIRECT the Clerk to remove Lori Ordiway as appellant’s attorney of 

record.

We ORDER the trial court to appoint new counsel to represent appellant in this appeal 

and to transmit to this Court, within FIFTEEN DAYS of the date of this order, the supplemental 

record containing the order appointing new counsel.

We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order, by electronic transmission, to the 

Honorable Jeanine Howard, Presiding Judge, Criminal District Court No. 6; Felicia Pitre, Dallas

County District Clerk; Lori Ordiway; and the Dallas County District Attorney’s Office.
We ABATE the appeal to allow the trial court to comply with this order. The appeal will 

be reinstated fifteen days from the date of this order or when the order appointing new counsel is 

received.

/s/ ADA BROWN 

JUSTICE
[Cite as Rockaway Park Holdings Corp. v. Davey Kent, Inc., 2018-Ohio-4728.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT 

 PORTAGE COUNTY, OHIO 

ROCKAWAY PARK HOLDINGS CORP., : MEMORANDUM OPINION 

 Plaintiff-Appellee, : 

 CASE NO. 2018-P-0073 

 - vs - : 

DAVEY KENT, INC., : 

 Defendant, : 

 

J. THOMAS MYERS, II, : 

 

 Defendant-Appellant. : 

Civil Appeal from the Portage County Court of Common Pleas, Case No. 2017 CV 

00988. 

Judgment: Appeal dismissed. 

Aaron Matthew Cole, Thomas & Thomas, 2323 Park Avenue, Cincinnati, OH 45206 (For 

Plaintiff-Appellee). 

J. Thomas Myers, II, pro se, 200 West Williams Street, Kent, OH 44240 (DefendantAppellant).

TIMOTHY P. CANNON, J. 

{¶1} On September 28, 2018, appellant, J. Thomas Myers, II, filed a notice of 

appeal from an August 31, 2018 entry of the Portage County Court of Common Pleas. In 

that entry, the trial court overruled appellant’s motion to dismiss for improper venue and 

lack of personal jurisdiction. 
2

{¶2} On October 22, 2018, appellee, Rockaway Park Holdings Corp., filed a 

motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of a final appealable order. Appellee posits that 

appellant has appealed from the denial of a motion to dismiss, which is not a final order 

within the meaning of R.C. 2505.02. 

{¶3} Appellant filed no response to the motion to dismiss the appeal. 

{¶4} For this court to have jurisdiction over this matter, the appealed entry must 

be final and appealable pursuant to R.C. 2505.02. This court has held that an order 

denying a motion to dismiss not a final appealable order. Stanek v. Stanek, 11th Dist. 

Lake No. 2009-Ohio-6859; see, also, Ferrell v. Standard Oil Co. of Ohio, 11 Ohio St.3d 

169, 171 (1984). 

{¶5} Based upon the foregoing analysis, the judgment of the trial court in this 

matter is not a final appealable order. Thus, this court is without jurisdiction to consider 

this appeal. Appellee’s motion to dismiss is granted, and this appeal is hereby dismissed 

for lack of a final appealable order. 

{¶6} Appeal dismissed. 

DIANE V. GRENDELL, J., 

CYNTHIA WESTCOTT RICE, J., 

concur.
### -82 -80 -78 -76

36 38 40 

## ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



## ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 

### 500 1000 1500 100 18 12 06 00 06/22 

## NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

# Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 22 Jun 06

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 38.77 N 77.11 WMeters AGL
S. J. Res. 37 

One Hundred Sixteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE FIRST SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and nineteen 

Joint Resolution 

Providing for congressional disapproval of the proposed export to the United Arab 

Emirates, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the 

Republic of France of certain defense articles and services. 

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

United States of America in Congress assembled, That the issuance 

of an export license with respect to any of the following proposed 

exports to the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom of Great 

Britain and Northern Ireland, or France is prohibited: 

(1) The transfer of the following defense articles, including 

defense services and technical data, described in Executive 

Communication 1425 (EC–1425) submitted to Congress pursuant to section 36(c) of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 

2776(c)) and published in the Congressional Record on June 

3, 2019: The proposed transfer of 44,000 GBU–12 Paveway 

II Kits and the proposed transfer of 16,000 GBU–10 Paveway 

II Kits. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 7612** 

ANTON JOHNSON , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v.

AMY PHENIX , Defendant

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh

. Terrence W. Boyle , District Judge. ( 5:13

- ct

- 03312

- BO )

Submitted : March 17, 2015 Decided: March 19, 2015

Before WILKINSON and KING , Circuit Judges , and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Anton Johnson , Appellant Pro Se. Eric Patrick Edgerton , Francis Lachicotte Zemp, Jr. , ROBERTS & STEVENS, PA, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Anton Johnson appeal s the district court ’ s order dismissing
his civil action for failure to state a claim. See Fed. R. Civ.
P. 12(b)(6). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court. Johnson v. Phenix , No. 5:13

- ct

- 03312

- BO
(E.D.N.C. Oct. 9, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
§ 46.115 IRB records. ( a ) An institution, or when appropriate an IRB, shall prepare and maintain adequate documentation of IRB activities, including the following: ( 1 ) Copies of all research proposals reviewed, scientific evaluations, if any, that accompany the proposals, approved sample consent documents, progress reports submitted by investigators, and reports of injuries to subjects.
( 2 ) Minutes of IRB meetings which shall be in sufficient detail to show attendance at the meetings; actions taken by the IRB; the vote on these actions including the number of members voting for, against, and abstaining; the basis for requiring changes in or disapproving research; and a written summary of the discussion of controverted issues and their resolution.
( 3 ) Records of continuing review activities.
( 4 ) Copies of all correspondence between the IRB and the investigators.
( 5 ) A list of IRB members in the same detail as described is § 46.103(b)(3).
( 6 ) Written procedures for the IRB in the same detail as described in § 46.103(b)(4) and § 46.103(b)(5).
( 7 ) Statements of significant new findings provided to subjects, as required by § 46.116(b)(5).
( b ) The records required by this policy shall be retained for at least 3 years, and records relating to research which is conducted shall be retained for at least 3 years after completion of the research. All records shall be accessible for inspection and copying by authorized representatives of the department or agency at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under Control Number 0990-0260) [56 FR 28012, 28020, June 18, 1991, as amended at 70 FR 36328, June 23, 2005]
Suppliers of Blind Quality Control (QC) Urine Samples

Date: August 2012

A list of blind sample suppliers has been compiled by the Division of Workplace Programs (DWP), for 

information purposes only, to facilitate compliance with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 

Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs. It does not constitute an 

endorsement for any or all of the vendors. It reflects solely the information supplied to this office by those 

vendors who requested inclusion on the list. 

These urine blind samples are DEA registered Exempt Chemical Preparations intended for in vitro 

diagnostic/forensic usage (21 CFR 1308.24). The purchaser would not be required to hold a DEA license to 

acquire and use (redistribute) them as part of a workplace drug testing program. However, the purchaser 

should ensure that the vendor complies with this DEA required exemption.

Any supplier interested in having its name added to the list below should contact DWP at 240-276-2600.

Professional Toxicology Services

(formerly A. T. Laboratories)

7917 Bond Street

Lenexa, KS 66214

Contact: Dr. Stan Kammerer

Phone: 913-599-3535

Fax: 913-599-0660

Email: atlaboratories@sbcglobal.net

Website: http://www.protoxservices.com

Abuse Control Associates

c/o KKL Enterprises, Inc.

7 Robinson Spur

Huntsville, TX 77320

Contact: Charles Rushing

Phone: 936-436-9026

Fax: 936-435-0578

Email: kklinc@wt.net

Duo Research, Inc.

0085 Bunkhouse Place

P.O. Box 3360

Eagle, CO 81631-3360

Contact: Dr. Robert Willette

Phone: 970-328-5385

Fax: 970-328-5387

Email: RobertWillette@duoresearch.com

Dyna-Tek, Inc. 

8369 Nieman Road 

Lenexa, KS 66214 

Contact: Kevin J. Dyches

Phone: 913-438-6363 

Fax: 913-438-6111 

Email: ksdyches@aol.com

Website: http://www.dtitesting.com
ElSohly Laboratories, Inc.

5 Industrial Park Drive

Oxford, MS 38655

Contact: Dr. Mahmoud ElSohly

Phone: 662-236-2609

Fax: 662-234-0253

Email: elsohly@elsohly.com

Website: http://www.elsohly.com

National Toxicology Specialists

1425 Elm Hill Pike

Nashville, TN 37210

Contact: Dr. Howard Taylor

Phone: 615-353-1888

Fax: 615-356-1890

Email: htaylor@drugtestinfo.com 

Website: http://www.drugtestinfo.com/

Protect Services

2184 Silveridge Trail

Westlake, Ohio 44145

Contact: Dr. David Fretthold

Phone: 440-899-9923

Fax: 440-899-7199

Email: dwfretthhold@yahoo.com

RTI International

Center for Forensic Sciences

3040 Cornwallis Road, Bldg. #3

Research Triangle Park, NC 27709

Contact: Dr. Francis M. Esposito

Phone: 919-316-3837 / 1-800-334-8571 x 23837

Fax: 919-541-7042

Email: esposito@rti.org

Website: http://www.rti.org

Quality Assurance Co.

310 Commerce Dr.

Martinez, GA 30907

Contact: Dr. Roy Altman, Tom Lavin, Margie Logan

Phone: 706-863-6536

Fax: 706-863-3313

Email: qas@toxicologycontrols.com

Sure-Tech Diagnostic Associates

11040 Lin Valle Drive, Suite D

St. Louis, MO 63123

Contact: Dr. Quincy Crider

Phone: 800-678-8933 / 314-894-8933 

Fax: 314-894-5223

Email: INFO@SURE-TECH.NET

Website: http://www.sure-tech.net
#### § 37.5 Date of receipt.

A complaint or charge of employment discrimination is deemed to be filed, for purposes of determining timeliness, on the date the complaint or charge is first received by a Federal agency with section 504 or ADA jurisdiction, regardless of whether it is subsequently transferred to another agency for processing.
§ 381.104 Annual adjustment of fees. ( a ) *Update and publication.* The Commission, by its designee the Executive Director, will update its fees each fiscal year according to the formula in paragraph (c) of this section. The Executive Director will publish the fees in the Federal Register.
( b ) *Payment of updated fees.* Any person who submits a filing for which a fee is established in this part must pay the currently effective fee unless a waiver is granted.
( c ) *Formula.* ( 1 ) Except as provided in paragraph (c)(2) of this section, the formula for determining each fee is the work months dedicated to the given fee category for the six fiscal years 1987 through 1992 or all years prior to FY 93 for which data are available divided by the number of actual completions in the six fiscal years 1987 through 1992 or all years prior to FY 93 for which data are available multiplied by the average monthly employee cost in the most recent fiscal year for which data are available.
( 2 ) With respect to the fees charged to pipelines filing pursuant to § 381.207(a), the fee for the first year will be $1,000. The formula for the fee in future years will be the work months from the immediately prior year divided by the number of actual completions in that year multiplied by the average monthly employee cost in the most recent fiscal year for which data are available. With the addition of future years, the formula for § 381.207(a) fees will be updated to include that year as part of the base period.
( d ) *Effective date of fee.* Any fee updated under this section is effective on the thirtieth day after publication in the Federal Register of the revised sections in this part, unless otherwise specified in the Federal Register notice.
[Order 360, 49 FR 5081, Feb. 10, 1984, as amended by Order 494, 53 FR 15382, Apr. 29, 1988; Order 521, 55 FR 12171, Apr. 2, 1990; 58 FR 2975, Jan. 7, 1993]
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**

June 5, 2024

No. 04

- 23

- 00430

- CR

EX PARTE Pedro JASSO

- CAMACHO

From the County Court
, Kinney County, Texas Trial Court No. 12183CR Honorable Susan D. Reed , Judge Presiding

ORDER

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS Pedro Jasso

- Camacho’s appeal of the denial of his application for pretrial writ of habeas corpus for want of jurisdiction. We further consider Jasso

- Camacho’s appeal as a petition for writ of mandamus and DENY his request for mandamus relief WITHOUT PREJUDICE

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52.8(a).

It is so ORDERED on June 5, 2024

.

_____________________________ Luz Elena D. Chapa , Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 5th day of June, 2024

.

_____________________________ Luz Estrada , Chief Deputy Clerk