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

|  |  |
|--|--|

| ** ** |
|------------|

|   | ****Eliot Ness**** 
129 pages

Information about the relationship between Ness, former Prohibition Agent, and the FBI while he was Director of Public Safety, Cleveland, Ohio, during the 1930's, followed by other law enforcement positions.

**Part 01**
**Part 02**
**Part 03**
**Part 04**
**Part 05**

Introduction
Reading Room Index - A   B   C   D   E    F   G- H   I    J    K   L   M   N   -O   P   Q   R   S   T   U-V   W   X   Y   Z   
Electronic Reading Room
- Alphabetical Listing- Espionage-Famous Persons-Gangster Era- Historical Interest- Unusual Phenomena-Violent CrimeFBI              File Fact Sheet FOIA Request Instructions- FOIA Request Form - Privacy Waiver and Certificate of Identity Form Privacy Act Instructions- Privacy Act Request FormDOJ              Reference GuideU.S.              DOJ FOIASearch
All of these publications are in PDF (Portable Document Format). To view them you will need to have the Adobe Acrobat Reader plug-in installed on your computer. The Reader can be downloaded at no cost from Adobe's site on the World Wide Web.   If you have difficulty accessing any material on this site because of a disability, please contact us in writing or via telephone and we will work with you to make the information available.

Freedom of Information/Privacy Act Section    202-324-5520 |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
**Exhibit32.2**

**CERTIFICATION**

Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (the “ExchangeAct”) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted), Nancy J. Baker, Chief Financial Officer of Cymer,Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Registrant”), hereby certifies that, to thebest of her knowledge:

1.     The Registrant’s quarterlyreport on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2007, to which this certificationis attached as Exhibit 32.2 (the “Report”), fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act; and

2.     The information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Registrant.

**In Witness Whereof**, the undersigned has sether hand hereto as of the 7th day of August, 2007.
| /s/Nancy J. Baker                       |   |
|-----------------------------------------|--------|
| Nancy J. Baker, Chief Financial Officer |

 

 

This certificationaccompanies the quarterly report on Form 10-Q to which it relates, is notdeemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to beincorporated by reference into any filing of Cymer, Inc. under the SecuritiesAct of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended(whether made before or after the date of the quarterly report on Form 10-Q towhich it relates), irrespective of any general incorporation language containedin such filing.

----
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs

Washington, DC 20555

Phone 301-415-8200 Fax 301-415-2234

Internet:opa@nrc.gov

No. 99-37 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Friday, February 26, 1999)

NOTE TO EDITORS:

A subcommittee of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Advisory Committee on

Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) will discuss proposed committee activities and the status of the

appointment of a new member when it meets March 9 in Rockville, Maryland.

The ACRS subcommittee on planning and procedures will meet at 1:00 p.m. until the

conclusion of business in Room T-2B1 of the agency’s Two White Flint North Building at 11545

Rockville Pike.

Other aspects of the meeting, including an opportunity for public comment, will be

described in a forthcoming edition of the Federal Register.

###
### §526a. Repealed. Pub. L. 100–17, title I, §135(f), Apr. 2, 1987, 101 Stat. 174

Section, act Pub. L. 93–87, title I, §133(b), Aug. 13, 1973, 87 Stat. 267, authorized Secretary of Transportation to promulgate regulations establishing guidelines governing any increase in tolls for use of any bridge constructed pursuant to either the General Bridge Act of 1906 or the General Bridge Act of 1946.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Study of Toll Bridge Authority; Investigation and Study of Federal Statutes and Regulations; Report to Congress

Section 133(a) of Pub. L. 93–87 directed Secretary of Transportation to study the existing Federal laws and regulations governing toll bridges over navigable waters of United States and submit a report containing recommendations regarding action to be taken to assure reasonable nationwide tolls no later than July 1, 1974, except in the case of the toll bridge at Chester, Illinois, where the Secretary was directed to submit a similar report no later than Dec. 31, 1973, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 100–17, title I, §135(f), Apr. 2, 1987, 101 Stat. 174.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 3, 2019

No. 04-18-00848-CR

Eusebio CASTILLO, Jr.,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 187th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017CR5376A

Honorable Joey Contreras, Judge Presiding

ORDE R

This court has received notice that appellant died on April 1, 2019. Because this appeal 

was perfected before appellant’s death, and we have not yet issued a mandate, it is ORDERED

that this appeal is PERMANENTLY ABATED. See TEX. R. APP. P. 7.1(a)(2); Vargas v. State, 

659 S.W.2d 422, 423 (Tex. Crim. App. 1983).

Additionally, appellant’s appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw. Counsel’s 

motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

_________________________________

Irene Rios, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 3rd day of July, 2019.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
### §1016. Administration

Administration of this chapter shall be under the principles of multiple use of lands and resources, and geothermal leases shall, insofar as feasible, allow for coexistence of other leases of the same lands for deposits of minerals under the laws applicable to them, for the location and production of claims under the mining laws, and for other uses of the areas covered by them. Operations under such other leases or for such other uses, however, shall not unreasonably interfere with or endanger operations under any lease issued pursuant to this chapter, nor shall operations under leases so issued unreasonably interfere with or endanger operations under any lease, license, claim, or permit issued pursuant to the provisions of any other Act.

(Pub. L. 91–581, §17, Dec. 24, 1970, 84 Stat. 1571; Pub. L. 109–58, title II, §236(17), Aug. 8, 2005, 119 Stat. 672.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2005—Pub. L. 109–58 inserted section catchline.
NRC NEWS

 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION II

61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta GA 30303

Web Site: www.nrc.gov

No. II-04-016 March 22, 2004

CONTACT: Ken Clark (404)562-4416 E-mail: OPA2@nrc.gov

Roger Hannah (404)562-4417

 

NRC TO MEET WITH DOMINION ENERGY OFFICIALS TO DISCUSS SAFETY

PERFORMANCE AT SURRY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with Dominion Energy officials on

Thursday, April 8, to discuss the results of NRC’s annual assessment of safety performance at the Surry

nuclear power plant near Surry, Virginia.

The meeting will be held at 1:00 p.m. in the Surry Government Center, 45 School Street in

Surry. The public is invited to observe the meeting, and NRC officials will be available before the

conclusion of the meeting to answer any questions.

A letter from the NRC to Dominion Energy addresses plant safety performance during the

previous year and forms the basis for the meeting discussions. The letter states that, overall, Surry

operated safely but the NRC will conduct additional inspections during the coming year beyond those

normally done. The NRC has already conducted a supplemental inspection related to a past situation

in Unit 1 where emergency AC power was unavailable (had it been needed) and is conducting a

supplemental inspection of circumstances associated with previous unplanned scrams (automatic

shutdowns) in excess of regulatory allowances in Unit 2. 

 In addition, the NRC said the utility was notified this past February 2 of a preliminary finding

related to mitigation of fires which was of low to moderate safety significance in Unit 1 and of low

safety significance in Unit 2. The agency said, based upon a final significance determination of these

events, additional inspections may be warranted.

 The letter is available from Region II Public Affairs and on the NRC web site at

www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/sur_2003q4.pdf . It says the NRC will 

conduct inspections at Surry during the coming year which include reactor pressure head lower head

penetration nozzles, reactor containment sump blockage and spent fuel material control and

accounting. The agency will also continue inspections of the implementation of security orders and

newly developed portions of the plant’s security program. 

 Current performance indicators for the two units at the Surry plant are available at 

www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/SUR1/sur1_chart.html and 

www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/SUR2/sur2_chart.html

###
Lakeman, Sean 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Sean, 

ArthurS. McDaniel [asmcdaniel@aqm.co.knox.tn.us] 

Friday, June 07, 201311:14 AM 

Lakeman, Sean 

Ia I iddington@aqm .co.knox. tn .us 

Knox County Regulatons Changes October 17, 2012 

The wording of Section 13.l.F.l is unclear. The first provision should refer to the regulations, not the permits issued 

under the authority of the regulations .. We will address this at our next Board Meeting. 

Steve McDaniel, P.E. 

Knox County Air Quality Management 

1
### §554. Duty of shipowners and officers to furnish information to person in local charge of improvement; penalty

Owners, agents, masters, and clerks of vessels arriving at or departing from localities where works of river and harbor improvement are carried on shall furnish, on application of the persons in local charge of the works, a comprehensive statement of vessels, passengers, freight, and tonnage.

Every person or persons offending against the provisions of this section shall, for each and every offense, be liable to a fine of $100, or imprisonment not exceeding two months, to be enforced in any district court in the United States within whose territorial jurisdiction such offense may have been committed.

(Feb. 21, 1891, ch. 252, §§1, 2, 26 Stat. 766.)
#### Time, Incorporated, Respondent, *v.*Life Color Laboratory, Inc., Appellant.

First Department,

November 13, 1951.

*Andrew Eckel*of counsel *(Richard T. Graham*and *Patrick Hughes*with him on the brief; *Hoyle & Heffernan,*attorneys), for appellant.

*Harold R. Medina, Jr.,*of counsel *(Albert Rosenblum*with him on the brief; *Grayath, Swaine S Moore,*attorneys), for ^sppiident,. -." _ , A .' . -."

*52
      *Per Curiam.*

Plaintiff undoubtedly has an exclusive right to publish a picture magazine under the title “ Life ” provided it adheres to the style and format of its registered trade-mark.

The word *‘1*Life ’ ’ as used by defendant as part of its name ‘1 Life Color Laboratory, Inc., ’ ’ is employed solely in its descriptive sense and without conveying any other meaning. The trial court properly found no evidence of any damage to plaintiff, or that defendant had any intention of *“*palming off ” its service as that of plaintiff’s, or that any person has ever been confused by the similarity of names so as to form the belief that defendant’s service was furnished by or rendered under the sponsorship of plaintiff.

However, we do not agree with the conclusion that defendant’s use of the word *“*Life ” as part of its name in connection with development and printing of color photographs is likely to cause confusion as to source or origin, nor do we think that plaintiff has acquired a secondary meaning in the word *“*Life ” in the field of photography to the extent that its use as part of the name of defendant would constitute unfair competition. There was, therefore, no basis for a decree enjoining defendant from using the word “ Life ” in its corporate name or business.

The judgment so far as appealed from should be reversed, with costs to the appellant and the complaint should be dismissed on the merits.

Settle order containing findings of fact and conclusions of law accordingly.

Glennon, Cohn and Callahan, JJ., concur; Peck, P. J. and Dore, J., dissent and vote to affirm.

Judgment reversed, with costs to the appellant. Settle order on notice.
Opinion issued November 21, 2013.

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-13-00560-CR

———————————

BRANDON LARUE JACKSON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 248th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 1323165

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Pursuant to an agreement with the State, appellant, Brandon Larue Jackson, 

pleaded guilty to the offense of murder.1The trial court accepted the plea 

 

1

See TEX. PEN. CODE ANN. § 19.02 (West 2011).
2

agreement, assessed appellant’s punishment at confinement for forty years, and 

certified that this is a plea-bargained case and he has no right of appeal. We 

dismiss the appeal.

In a plea-bargained case, a defendant may appeal only those matters that 

were raised by written motion and ruled on before trial or after obtaining the trial 

court’s permission to appeal. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. Art 44.02 (West 2006);

TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). An appeal must be dismissed if a certification showing 

that the defendant has a right of appeal has not been made part of the record. TEX.

R. APP. P. 25.2(d).

Here, the trial court’s certification is included in the record and states that 

this is a plea-bargained case and appellant has no right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 25.2(a)(2). The record supports the trial court’s certification.2See Dears v. State, 

154 S.W.3d 610, 615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Because appellant has no right of 

appeal, we must dismiss this appeal. See Chavez v. State, 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 

(Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (“A court of appeals, while having jurisdiction to ascertain 

whether an appellant who plea-bargained is permitted to appeal by Rule 25.2(a)(2), 

 

2 Although appellant filed written pretrial motions for psychiatric evaluations to 

determine competency and sanity, the motions were granted and, therefore, do not 

provide a basis for appeal. See Woods v. State, 108 S.W.3d 314, 316 n.6 (Tex. 

Crim. App. 2003) (distinguishing motion for examination from court 

determination of competency). Further, the plea agreement states that appellant

waived the right to appeal if the court accepted the plea agreement. A waiver of 

the right to appeal is valid if made when the defendant knows the sentence he will 

receive. See Ex parte Delaney, 207 S.W.3d 794, 798 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).
3

must dismiss a prohibited appeal without further action, regardless of the basis for 

the appeal.”).

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. We dismiss all 

pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Sharp, and Brown.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1443 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1443

 To amend section 251 of the National Housing Act to enable homebuyers 
  to make use of the authority of the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
        Development to insure hybrid adjustable rate mortgages.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 26, 2003

  Mr. Calvert (for himself, Mr. Israel, Mr. Feeney, and Mr. Davis of 
   Alabama) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend section 251 of the National Housing Act to enable homebuyers 
  to make use of the authority of the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
        Development to insure hybrid adjustable rate mortgages.

    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 ``Access to Affordable Mortgages 
Act''.

SEC. 2. HYBRID ARMS.

    (a) In General.--Section 251(d)(1)(C) of the National Housing Act 
(12 U.S.C. 1715z-16(d)(1)(C)) is amended by striking ``five'' and 
inserting ``three''.
    (b) Applicability.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to mortgages executed on or after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 99.2


                            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 American Tax Credit Trust, a Delaware
statutory business trust Series I (the "Registrant") on Form 10-Q for the period
ending June 29, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"), I, Neal Ludeke, Chief Financial Officer of Richman
American Credit Corp., Manager of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
(S) 1350, as adopted pursuant to (S) 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

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

      (2)   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Registrant.



/s/ Neal Ludeke
------------------------------
Neal Ludeke
Chief Financial Officer of Richman
American Credit Corp., Manager
of the Registrant
August 13, 2003
§ 300.201 Examinations. ( a ) The Office makes available information that will assist members of the public in understanding the purpose of, and preparing for, civil service examinations. This includes the types of questions and the categories of knowledge or skill pertinent to a particular examination. The Office does not release the following: ( 1 ) Testing and examination materials used solely to determine individual qualifications, and
( 2 ) test material, including test plans, item analysis data, criterion instruments, and other material the disclosure of which would compromise the objectivity of the testing process.
( b ) The Office maintains control over the security and release of testing and examination materials which it has developed and made available to agencies for initial competitive appointment or inservice use unless the materials were developed specifically for an agency through a reimbursable contractual agreement. These testing and examination materials include, and are subject to the same controls as, those described in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this section.
( c ) Each employee entrusted with test material has a positive duty to protect the confidentiality of that material and to assure release only as required to conduct an examination authorized by the Office.
( d ) An applicant may review his or her own answers in a written test, but only in the presence of an employee of the Office or, for the convenience of the Office and requester, in the presence of an employee of another agency designated by OPM. The applicant may not review a test booklet in connection with this review.
( e ) The Office will release information concerning the results of examinations only to the individual concerned, or to parties explicitly designated by the individual.
( f ) The Office will not reveal the names of applicants for civil service positions or eligibles on civil service registers, certificates, employment lists, or other lists of eligibles, or their ratings or relative standings.
[50 FR 3312, Jan. 24, 1985, as amended at 60 FR 3057, Jan. 13, 1995]
### -79 -78 -77 -76 -75
37 38 39 

## ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲


## ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 

### 500 1000 1500 100 18 12 06 00 08/30 

## NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

# Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 30 Aug 07

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 38.92 N 77.01 WMeters AGL 

## ★ ■ ■ ■ ■ 

## ★ ■ ■ ■ ■ 

## ★ ● ● ● ●


## ★ ● ● ● ●
#### § 212.102 Authority to make determinations.

OPM determines finally whether a position is in the competitive service.