alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 151
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 151 appear by CBP Dec. No. 16-26, 81 FR 93021, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 151.45 Storage tanks bonded as warehouses. ( a ) *Application.* Tanks for the storage of imported petroleum or petroleum products in bulk may be bonded as warehouses of class 2 if to be used exclusively for the storage of petroleum or petroleum products belonging or consigned to the owner or lessee of the tank. In addition to the documents and bonds required to be filed with the application to bond (see § 19.2 of this chapter), the certified plans and gauge tables required by § 151.44 shall be filed.
( b ) *Removal of nonbonded petroleum.* If a bonded tank is not empty at the time the first importation of bonded petroleum or petroleum products is to be stored therein, the amount of nonbonded petroleum or petroleum products in the tank shall be withdrawn by the proprietor as soon as possible. The request to withdraw shall be in the form of a letter and no formal withdrawal need be filed. Domestic or duty-paid petroleum or petroleum products shall not thereafter be stored in the tank as long as the tank remains bonded.
( c ) *Information on warehouse withdrawal.* Warehouse withdrawals of petroleum or petroleum products from bonded tanks shall show the information specified in § 151.41, as well as the designation of the tank from which the merchandise is to be withdrawn. Such withdrawals may be made for “____ U.S. gallons, more or less”, but in no case may the estimate vary by more than three percent from the gross quantity unladen.
[T.D. 80-142, 45 FR 36384, May 30, 1980, as amended by T.D. 87-39, 52 FR 9790, Mar. 26, 1987]
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION III

 801 Warrenville Road

 Lisle, IL 60532

 Web Site:

http://www.nrc.gov/OPA

No. III-01-041 July 24, 2001

CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630)829-9663/e-mail: rjs2@nrc.gov

Pam Alloway-Mueller (630)829-9662/e-mail: pla@nrc.gov

NRC STAFF PROPOSES $3,000 FINE AGAINST MIDWEST TESTING, INC. OF MISSOURI

FOR FAILING TO CONTROL LICENSED MATERIAL

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has proposed a $3,000 fine against Midwest Testing,

Inc., of Bridgeton, Missouri, for violating NRC requirements by failing to maintain control and

constant surveillance of a portable moisture density gauge while it was in an unrestricted area. The

gauge, which contains a radioactive source, was lost and has not been recovered.

The gauge is used to measure soil conditions at road and building construction sites.

On April 6, the company notified the NRC that a portable moisture density gauge had been left

unattended, unlocked, and unsecured on a truckís tailgate for about 15 minutes. The gauge operator

then drove from the job site without properly checking or securing the gauge in the truck bed. Shortly

after leaving, the gauge operator noticed that the gauge was no longer in the back of the truck.

In notifying the company of the proposed fine, NRC Regional Administrator James E. Dyer

noted that Midwest Testing had taken corrective actions to prevent a reoccurrence of the situation,

including additional training for employees. However, he said, a newly adopted enforcement policy

provides that a fine be proposed to reflect the significance of the violation and emphasize the

importance of maintaining control of licensed material. The specified fines included in the

enforcement policy were developed to correspond to roughly three times the cost of proper disposal.

Midwest Testing has 30 days to pay the fine or protest it. If the fine is protested and

subsequently imposed by the NRC staff, the company may request a hearing.

# # #
# Materials Not Included in **Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket**

Docket Number: F AA - 2014 - 0491 Directorate Identifier: 2014NM023AD

604 - 57 - 007 --- 9/26/13 605 - 57 - 005 --- 9/26/13

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the Supplemental AD Docket 

### MA **Y BE VIEWED AT:** Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate Rules Docket 1601 Lind Ave. SW., Renton, WA 98057 425.227.1221 **DURING THE HOURS OF:** 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Form Date: 0 3/05/2008
460 P.2d 72

#### Preston H. COLBY, Relator, v. John B. McMANUS, Jr., District Judge, Second Judicial District, Division I, Respondent.

No. 8931.

Supreme Court of New Mexico.

Oct. 22, 1969.

MOISE, COMPTON and TACKETT, Justices, concurring; NOBLE, Chief Justice, and WATSON, Justice, being absent and not participating;

Ordered that the petition for writ of prohibition be and the same is hereby denied.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 204 (Friday, October 22, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 62074]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-23662]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[CA-190-04-1610-DS]


Notice of Extension of Comment Period for the Draft Resource 
Management Plan Amendment and Draft Environmental Impact Statement for 
the Clear Creek Management Area

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management.

ACTION: Notice of Extension of Comment Period for the Draft Resource 
Management Plan Amendment and Draft Environmental Impact Statement 
(Draft RMP/Draft EIS) for the Clear Creek Management Area, Hollister 
Field Office, California.

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

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) announces an extension of 
the comment period on the Draft RMP/Draft EIS for the Clear Creek 
Management Area. The Original Notice of Availability issued July 19, 
2004 (69FR43011) provided for a comment period to end on October 15, 
2004. BLM is extending the comment period to November 15, 2004 to allow 
agencies and the public additional time to provide comments on the 
Draft RMP/Draft EIS.

DATES: Comments on the Draft RMP/Draft EIS must be received no later 
than November 15, 2004 at the address listed below.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to CCMA RMP Team, Bureau of 
Land Management, Hollister Field Office, 20 Hamilton Court, Hollister, 
CA 95023. Comments may also be sent by e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#8ac6eff9e6f3d5d9e7e3fee2cae9eba4e8e6e7a4ede5fc"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="327e57415e4b6d615f5b465a7251531c505e5f1c555d44">[email protected]</span></a>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: George E. Hill, Assistant Field 
Manager, at the above address, telephone number (831) 630-5036, or e-
mail; <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0344666c7164665c4b6a6f6f4360622d616f6e2d646c75"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="2c6b49435e4b4973644540406c4f4d024e4041024b435a">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: October 1, 2004.
Robert E. Beehler,
Field Office Manager, Hollister Field Office.
[FR Doc. 04-23662 Filed 10-21-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-40-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### The People of the State of New York v. Louis Valle, Defendant. Elvin N. Edwards, as Counsel for Defendant, Appellant, v. The People of the State of New York et al., Respondents.

No opinion. Close, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Taylor and Lewis, JJ., concur.
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION III

 801 Warrenville Road

 Lisle, IL 60532

 Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov/OPA

No. III-01-024 June 14, 2001

CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630)829-9663/e-mail: rjs2@nrc.gov

Pam Alloway-Mueller (630)829-9662/e-mail: pla@nrc.gov

NRC TO MEET WITH DETROIT EDISON COMPANY TO DISCUSS SAFETY

PERFORMANCE AT THE FERMI 2 NUCLEAR POWER STATION

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will meet with Detroit Edison Company officials June 21

to discuss the NRCís annual assessment of safety performance at its Fermi 2 Nuclear Power Station in

Newport, Michigan.

The meeting will begin at 6 p.m. EDT and will be held at the Monroe City Council Chambers

in Monroe City Hall, 120 East First Street in Monroe. The public is invited to observe the meeting. 

NRC officials will be available after the meeting to answer questions.

The annual assessment, referred to as the End-of-Cycle assessment, evaluates safety

performance at Fermi 2 from April 2000 through March 2001, and informs plant officials of the NRCís

plans for future inspections at the facility.

The Fermi 2 assessment letter and inspection plan are available at http://www.nrc.gov/OPA/ppr

or from the Region III Public Affairs Office. Current performance information for the plant is

available at http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/index.html.

# # #
[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. (Historicalpurposes)
**Title:****FY ... annual report**
 
2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005
 
SuDoc:ID 1.27:J 76/
Item Number:0900-I-18 (online)
CGP systemNumber:
 
November 1, 2017
###### Editorial Note on Part 134

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 134 appear at 72 FR 50042, Aug. 30, 2007.

#### § 134.101 Definitions.

As used in this part:

*AA/OHA* means the Assistant Administrator for OHA, who is also the Chief Hearing Officer.

*Act* means the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 631 *et seq.*

*Address* means the primary home or business address of a person or entity, including the street location or postal box number, city or town, state, and postal zip code.

*Administrative Judge* means a Hearing Officer, as described at 15 U.S.C. 634(i), appointed by OHA to adjudicate cases.

*Appeal petition* has the same meaning as petition.

*Area Office* means a Government Contracting Area Office or a Disaster Area Office of the Small Business Administration.

*Business day* means any day other than a Saturday, Sunday, or a Federal holiday.

*Day* means a calendar day, unless a Judge specifies otherwise.

*Hearing* means the presentation and consideration of argument and evidence. A hearing need not include live testimony or argument.

*Investment Act* means the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, 15 U.S.C. 661 *et seq.*

*Judge* means the Administrative Judge or Administrative Law Judge who decides an appeal or petition brought before OHA, or the AA/OHA when he or she acts as an Administrative Judge.

*NAICS code* means North American Industry Classification System code.

*OHA* means the Office of Hearings and Appeals.

*Party* means the petitioner, appellant, respondent, or intervenor, and the contracting officer in a NAICS code appeal.

*Person* means an individual or any form of business entity.

*Petition* (or *appeal petition*) means a written complaint, a written appeal from an SBA determination, or a written request for the initiation of proceedings before OHA.

*Petitioner* means the person who initially files a petition before OHA.

*Pleading* means a petition, an order to show cause commencing a case, an appeal petition, an answer, a response, or any amendment or supplement to those documents.

*Respondent* means any person or governmental agency against which a case has been brought before OHA.

*SBA* means the Small Business Administration.

*Size determination* means a formal size determination made by an Area Office and includes decisions by Government Contracting Area Directors that determine whether two or more concerns are affiliated for purposes of SBA's financial assistance programs, or other programs for which an appropriate SBA official requested an affiliation determination.

*Size Standard Petition* means a petition for reconsideration of a revised, modified, or established size standard filed with OHA pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 632(a)(9) and subpart I of this part.

*Step One* and *Step Two* refer to the steps of the Employee Dispute Resolution Process, see § 134.801(a) for more information.

[61 FR 2683, Jan. 29, 1996, as amended at 67 FR 47246, July 18, 2002; 69 FR 29208, May 21, 2004; 75 FR 47438, Aug. 6, 2010; 82 FR 25506, June 2, 2017]
### TiB{ ] O F 

# Q i i 0 Rnemorandu m U.S.Departmen t o f , . ^~ , , . ,- , Transportotio n - i - A - _,U
_ Offic e o f Th

e secretar

y o f Transportof lo n
Essentia l Ai r

Service a

t Chisholin/Hibbing , Minnesot a (Docke t DOT-OST-2003-15796 ) ^ - , , , n^, , Subject : Thie f

Rive r Falls , Minnesot aDate : Apri l 11,201 1 (Docke t DOT-OST-2001-10642 ) Repl y T)enni s J
. Del^ny , Chie f ^^ ^ ^ " ^ ^ Michae l Martin , X-5 3 From : EA S & Domesti c Analysis , X-5 3 Attn
. Ext
. 6649 4 of : To : Docket s Operations , M-3 0
B y Order 2011-4-1 , Apri l 1 , 2011 , w e requeste dproposal s for essentia l ai r

servic e (EAS ) a

t Chisholm/Hibbin g andThie f Rive r Falls , Mimiesota , n o late r than May 3,2011
. B y emai l date dApri l 5 , 2011 , Delt aAir Line s (Delta ) indicate dtha t i t continue s t o evaluat e utilizatio n o f

th e aircraf

t typ e currentl y servicin g th e tw o communities , an dtha t thos e decision s wil l no t b e complete di

n tim e for th e developmen t

o f alonger-termproposa l t o serv e th e tw o communities
. Delt aha s requeste dthat w e exten dth e du e dat e for proposal s t o Augus t

1 , 2011
. Wit hsuppoi t fromth e communities , andt o encourag e additiona l bid s fo r EA S service , w e hav e decide dt o grant

Delta' s request . All partie s mus t no w fil e competitiv e proposal s for EA S a t Chisholm/HibbingandThie f Rive r Fall s n o late r

tha n Augus t

1 , 2011
.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsFuzzy set methods for object recognition in space applicationsProgress on the following tasks is reported: (1) fuzzy set-based decision making methodologies; (2) feature calculation; (3) clustering for curve and surface fitting; and (4) acquisition of images. The general structure for networks based on fuzzy set connectives which are being used for information fusion and decision making in space applications is described. The structure and training techniques for such networks consisting of generalized means and gamma-operators are described. The use of other hybrid operators in multicriteria decision making is currently being examined. Numerous classical features on image regions such as gray level statistics, edge and curve primitives, texture measures from cooccurrance matrix, and size and shape parameters were implemented. Several fractal geometric features which may have a considerable impact on characterizing cluttered background, such as clouds, dense star patterns, or some planetary surfaces, were used. A new approach to a fuzzy C-shell algorithm is addressed. NASA personnel are in the process of acquiring suitable simulation data and hopefully videotaped actual shuttle imagery. Photographs have been digitized to use in the algorithms. Also, a model of the shuttle was assembled and a mechanism to orient this model in 3-D to digitize for experiments on pose estimation is being constructed.Document ID19930007370Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsKeller, James M.*(Missouri Univ. Columbia., United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateSeptember 30, 1991Subject CategoryComputer Programming And SoftwareReport/Patent NumberNASA-CR-191778NAS 1.26:191778Accession Number93N16559Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RICIS PROJ. SE-42CONTRACT_GRANT: NCC9-16Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19930007370.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

CASE NO.: 20-cv-61690-SINGHAL 

DEBRON WALLEN, 

SANJAY SHAKES, Individually and 

On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, 

Plaintiffs, 

vs. 

SVENSK MANAGEMENT, INC. & 

RICHARD FERNBACH 

_________________________________/ 

DEFENDANTS’ CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED 

PARTIES AND CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 

 Defendants Svensk Management, Inc. and Richard Fernbach, pursuant to this Honorable 

Court’s Order dated August 21, 2020 (ECF No. 5), hereby file their Certificate of Interested 

Parties and Corporate Disclosure Statement, as follows: 

 The following persons, associated persons, firms, partnerships or corporations have a 

financial interest in the outcome of this case, including subsidiaries, conglomerates, affiliates, 

parent corporations, and other identifiable legal entities related to a party: 

(a) Plaintiff Debron Wallen 

(b) Plaintiff Sanjay Shakes 

(c) Lubell & Rosen, LLC – counsel for Plaintiff 

(d) Joshua H. Sheskin, Esq. – counsel for Plaintiff 

(e) Amber L. Ruocco, Esq. – counsel for Plaintiff 

(f) Defendant Svensk Management, Inc. 

(g) Defendant Richard Fernbach 

(h) Littler Mendelson, P.C. – counsel for Defendant 

(i) Aaron Reed, Esq. – counsel for Defendant 

(j) Stella S. Chu, Esq. – counsel for Defendant 

Case 0:20-cv-61690-AHS Document 13 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/13/2020 Page 1 of 2
 

 2 

DATED, this 13th day of October 2020. Respectfully submitted, 

LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. 

Wells Fargo Center 

333 S.E. 2nd Avenue, Suite 2700 

Miami, Florida 33131 

Tel: (305) 400-7500 

Fax: (305) 603-2552 

By: /s/ Stella S. Chu 

Aaron Reed 

Florida Bar No. 0557153 

E-mail: areed@littler.com 

Stella S. Chu 

Florida Bar No. 060519 

E-mail: sschu@littler.com

Counsel for Defendant

 

4818-6292-3982.1 109338.1001 

Case 0:20-cv-61690-AHS Document 13 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/13/2020 Page 2 of 2
#### James Castillo MENDOZA, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Terry STEWART; Attorney General of the State of Arizona, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 00-17305.

D.C. No. CV-96-02699-RGS.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 13, 2002 *.

Decided May 24, 2002.

Before FERNANDEZ, THOMAS and WARD LAW, Circuit Judges.

*

This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, Mendoza’s request for oral argument is denied.

MEMORANDUM **

Arizona state prisoner James Castillo Mendoza appeals pro se the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition challenging a burglary conviction. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253. We review the district court’s denial of Mendoza’s habeas petition de novo, *see Turner v. Calderon,*281 F.3d 851, 864 (9th Cir.2002), and we affirm.

Mendoza contends that he was prejudiced by the admission of evidence that the victims had been threatened prior to testifying. A habeas petition may not be granted unless the alleged constitutional error “‘had a substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury’s verdict.’” *Brecht v. Abrahamson,*507 U.S. 619, 623, 113 S.Ct. 1710, 123 L.Ed.2d 353 (1993) (citation omitted). We conclude that although the admission of evidence of threats was improper, it did not have a substantial and injurious effect on the verdict, in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt including that Mendoza was confronted and restrained by the victims exiting their home and their property was found in his car. *See Bains v. Cambra,*204 F.3d 964, 973-74, 977-78 (9th Cir.), *cert. denied,*531 U.S. 1037, 121 S.Ct. 627, 148 L.Ed.2d 536 (2000) (holding that although admission of threats was in error and prosecutor’s closing arguments violated defendant’s constitutional rights, these errors did not merit habeas relief in light of the overwhelming evidence showing defendant’s guilt).

Because Mendoza was not prejudiced by the testimony about threats, we reject his claim that the prosecutor committed prejudicial misconduct by eliciting that testimony. *See Johnson v. Sublett,*63 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.1995) (holding that improper statements by the prosecutor were not grounds for habeas relief because the prosecutor’s conduct did not affect the jury’s verdict). Likewise, we reject Mendoza’s claim that he was prejudiced by his counsel’s failure to object to the admission of that evidence. *See Laboa v. Calderon,*224 F.3d 972, 980-981 (9th Cir.2000) (stating that because other evidence showed defendant’s guilt, defendant’s counsel’s failure to have evidence suppressed was not prejudicial and therefore defendant’s counsel’s assistance was not ineffective).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 6 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                  S. 6

       To improve the requirements for making a determination of 
 interchangeability of a biological product and its reference product.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           November 17, 2022

    Mr. Lee introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
  referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
       To improve the requirements for making a determination of 
 interchangeability of a biological product and its reference product.

    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 ``Biosimilar Red Tape Elimination 
Act''.

SEC. 2. BIOSIMILAR BIOLOGICAL PRODUCTS.

    Section 351(k) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 262(k)) 
is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (2)(A)(i)(I)(bb), by striking ``; and'' 
        and inserting ``; or''; and
            (2) in paragraph (4)--
                    (A) at the end of subparagraph (A)(ii), by striking 
                ``; and'' and inserting a period;
                    (B) by striking ``sufficient to show'' and all that 
                follows through ``(A) the biological product--'' and 
                inserting ``sufficient to show that the biological 
                product--'';
                    (C) by striking ``Upon review of an'' and inserting 
                the following:
                    ``(A) In general.--Upon review of an''; and
                    (D) by amending subparagraph (B) to read as 
                follows:
                    ``(B) Certain studies not required.--The Secretary 
                may not require, for a determination of 
                interchangeability described in subparagraph (A), that 
                a biological product undergo studies that assess the 
                risks of alternating or switching between use of the 
                biological product and the reference product.''.
                                 <all>
```