alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA

No. 14-1674

Filed June 24, 2015

IN THE INTEREST OF K.R.,

Minor Child,

J.R.,

Petitioner-Appellee,

C.W., Father,

Respondent-Appellant.

________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Jeffrey D. Farrell, 

Judge. 

A father appeals an order terminating his parental rights. AFFIRMED.

Molly E. Alley of Oliver Gravett Law Firm, P.C., Windsor Heights, for 

appellant.

Nicholas Cooper and Sara S. James of Whitfield & Eddy, P.L.C., Des 

Moines, for appellee.

Cami N. Eslick of Eslick Law, Indianola, attorney for minor child.

Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and Mullins, JJ.
2

MULLINS, J.

The mother of a four-year-old child petitioned to terminate the parental 

rights of the father. After hearing testimony and receiving exhibits into evidence 

at trial, the court terminated the father’s parental rights. The father has appealed.

The father argues there was not clear and convincing evidence that he 

abandoned the child under Iowa Code section 600A.8(3)(c) (2013) and 

termination was not in the child’s best interests. We have reviewed the record de 

novo. The district court filed a written Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and 

Order that identified and considered all the issues presented. We approve of the 

reasons and conclusions in the opinion and determine a full opinion would not 

augment or clarify existing case law. See Iowa Ct. R. 21.26(1)(d).

The district court properly determined that the father had failed to maintain 

substantial and continuous or repeated contact with the child and had failed to 

contribute to the support of the child in a reasonable amount. The mother did not 

go out of her way to make it easy for the father, but the responsibility to be a 

parent remained with him. We further find that his actions defy his expressions

of subjective intent to parent the child, and the father has failed to demonstrate 

any genuine intent to assume any duties imposed by the parent-child 

relationship. See Iowa Code §§ 600A.8(3)(c), .2(19). In August of 2012, the 

father moved to the east coast to live with a woman he met on the internet and 

only met once in person, and has remained unemployed for the last three years. 

We agree termination of the father’s parental rights is in the best interests 

of the child.
3

Accordingly, we affirm pursuant to Iowa Court Rule 21.26(1)(d). 

AFFIRMED.
UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 

 February 25, 2016 

IN RESPONSE, PLEASE 

 REFER TO: M160225A 

MEMORANDUM FOR: Brooke P. Clark, Director 

Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication 

FROM: Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary /RA/ 

SUBJECT: STAFF REQUIREMENTS – AFFIRMATION SESSION, 8:55 A.M., 

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2016, COMMISSIONERS' 

CONFERENCE ROOM, ONE WHITE FLINT NORTH, 

ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND (OPEN TO PUBLIC ATTENDANCE) 

I. SECY-15-0145 – NEXTERA ENERGY SEABROOK, LLC (SEABROOK STATION, 

UNIT 1): MOTION TO WITHDRAW FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 

The Commission approved a Memorandum and Order responding Order responding to a motion 

by Friends of the Coast and New England Coalition requesting the withdrawal, and re-issuance 

for public comment, of the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement prepared for the 

Seabrook Station, Unit 1 license renewal application. The Memorandum and Order denies the 

motion. 

(Subsequently, on February 25, 2016, the Secretary signed the Memorandum and Order.) 

II. SECY-16-0008 – SHINE MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (MEDICAL 

RADIOISOTOPE PRODUCTION FACILITY), MANDATORY HEARING DECISION 

The Commission approved a Memorandum and Order addressing the required findings and the 

issues discussed at the uncontested hearing concerning the application of SHINE Medical 

Technologies, Inc. to construct a medical radioisotope production facility in Janesville, 

Wisconsin. The Memorandum and Order authorizes issuance of the construction permit. 

(Subsequently, on February 25, 2016, the Secretary signed the Memorandum and Order.) 

cc: Chairman Burns 

 Commissioner Svinicki 

 Commissioner Ostendorff 

 Commissioner Baran 

 EDO 

 OGC 

 CFO 

 OCAA 

 OCA 
 OIG 

 OPA 

 ODs, RAs, ACRS, ASLBP (via E-Mail) 

 PDR
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3708 

To prohibit the Secretary of Labor from issuing a final rule that prevents 

the agricultural employment of minors to detassel. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 16, 2011 

Mr. FORTENBERRY (for himself and Mr. TERRY) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To prohibit the Secretary of Labor from issuing a final 

rule that prevents the agricultural employment of minors 

to detassel. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. RULE PREVENTING THE AGRICULTURAL EM4 PLOYMENT OF MINORS TO DETASSEL PRO5 HIBITED. 

6 To the extent that the proposed rule entitled ‘‘Child 

7 Labor Regulations, Orders and Statements of Interpreta8 tion; Child Labor Violations—Civil Money Penalties’’ pub9 lished by the Wage and Hour Division of the Department 

10 of Labor on September 2, 2011 (76 Fed. Reg. 54836 et 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3708 IH

1 seq.) prevents or otherwise effects the agricultural employ2 ment of minors to detassel, rogue, or otherwise engage in 

3 the production of seed or to engage in related and inci4 dental agricultural employment, the Secretary of Labor 

5 shall not issue a final rule on, or otherwise implement, 

6 the proposed rule. 

Æ 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
§ 1615.36 Use of alternate apparatus or procedures for tests for guaranty purposes. ( a ) Section 8(a) of the Flammable Fabrics Act (FFA, 15 U.S.C. 1197(a)) provides that no person shall be subject to criminal prosecution under section 7 of the FFA (15 U.S.C. 1196) for a violation of section 3 of the FFA (15 U.S.C. 1192) if that person establishes a guaranty received in good faith which meets all requirements set forth in section 8 of the FFA. One of those requirements is that the guaranty must be based upon “reasonable and representative tests” in accordance with the applicable standard.
( b ) Section 1615.31(f) of the regulations implementing the Standard for the Flammability of Children's Sleepwear: Sizes 0 through 6X (the Standard) provides that for purposes of supporting guaranties issued in accordance with section 8 of the FFA for items subject to the Standard, “reasonable and representative tests” are tests “performed pursuant to any sampling plan or authorized alternative sampling plan engaged in pursuant to the requirements of the Standard.”
( c ) At § 1615.35, the Commission has set forth conditions under which the Commission will approve the use of test apparatus or procedures other than those prescribed in the Standard for purposes of demonstrating compliance with the requirements of the Standard. Any person or firm meeting the requirements of § 1615.35 for use of alternate test apparatus or procedure for compliance with the Standard may also use such alternate test apparatus or procedures under the same conditions for purposes of conducting “reasonable and representative tests” to support guaranties of items subject to the Standard, following any sampling plan prescribed by the Standard or any approved alternate sampling plan.
( d ) The Commission will test fabrics and garments subject to the Standard for compliance with the Standard using the apparatus and procedures set forth in the Standard. The Commission will consider any failing results from compliance testing as evidence that the person or firm using alternate test apparatus or procedures has furnished a false guaranty in violation of section 8(b) of the FFA (15 U.S.C. 1197(b)).
[48 FR 21316, May 12, 1983]
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Environmental Protection Agency

          - [FRL-7844-1]

# AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency.

# ACTION:

Notice of settlement.

# SUMMARY:

Under section 122(h)(1) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has entered into an Agreement for Recovery of Past Cost (Agreement) at the Jehl Cooperage Company Inc Superfund Site (Site) located in Memphis, Shelby County, Tennessee, with Unocal. EPA will consider public comments on the Agreement until January 3, 2005. EPA may withdraw from or modify the Agreement should such comments disclose facts or considerations which indicate the Agreement is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate. Copies of the Agreement are available from: Ms. Paula V. Batchelor, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, Superfund Enforcement & Information Management Branch, Waste Management Division, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303, (404) 562-8887.

Written comment may be submitted to Paula V. Batchelor at the above address within 30 days of the date of publication.

Dated: November 16, 2004.

Rosalind Brown,

Chief, Superfund Enforcement & Information Management Branch.

[FR Doc. 04-26478 Filed 11-30-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3830 

To restrict the provision of defense articles and defense services to the 

Government of Iraq, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 25, 2012 

Mr. ROHRABACHER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Foreign Affairs 

A BILL 

To restrict the provision of defense articles and defense 

services to the Government of Iraq, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. RESTRICTIONS ON PROVISION OF DEFENSE AR4 TICLES AND DEFENSE SERVICES TO THE 

5 GOVERNMENT OF IRAQ. 

6 (a) RESTRICTION.—No defense articles or defense 

7 services may be provided to the Government of Iraq unless 

8 the President certifies to Congress that the Government 

9 of Iraq agrees that it will not use such defense articles 

10 or defense services or any other defense articles of defense 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 3830 IH

1 services provided to Iraq by the United States within the 

2 Kurdistan region of Iraq without the consent and agree3 ment of the Kurdistan Regional Government. 

4 (b) ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS.—If the President 

5 determines that Iraq has used defense articles or defense 

6 services in violation of the requirements of subsection (a), 

7 no further defense articles or defense services may be pro8 vided to the Government of Iraq unless the President cer9 tifies to Congress that— 

10 (1) the Government of Iraq has withdrawn the 

11 defense articles or defense services from Kurdistan 

12 and the Kurdistan Regional Government has con13 firmed the withdrawal of the defense articles or de14 fense services; and 

15 (2) the Kurdistan Regional Government has ap16 proved the provision to the Government of Iraq of 

17 such further defense articles or defense services. 

18 (c) DEFINITIONS.—In this section— 

19 (1) the term ‘‘defense article’’ has the meaning 

20 given the term in section 47(3) of the Arms Export 

21 Control Act; and 

22 (2) the term ‘‘defense service’’ has the meaning 

23 given the term in section 47(4) of the Arms Export 

24 Control Act. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
### §14221. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 14221 was editorially reclassified as section 12641 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.
#### §§ 210.3-07-210.3-08 [Reserved]
#### Althea B. Holliday, as Administratrix of the Estate of Frank Holliday, Deceased, Appellant, v. Paul L. Rockwell et al., Respondents. Althea B. Holliday, as Administratrix of the Estate of Frank Holliday, Deceased, Appellant, v. Eastern Freight Ways, Inc., Respondent.

These consolidated actions were heard by the court and jury at a Trial Term of the Supreme Court of Broome County. The jury’s verdict was against plaintiff for no cause for action. Plaintiff has appealed to this court from the judgment entered on the verdict and from two separate orders denying motions to set aside the verdict and for a new trial, the one upon the ground that the verdict was against and contrary to the weight of evidence and the other on the ground of irregularity and misconduct of the jury and the court clerk. On January 26, 1952, a farm truck owned and operated by plaintiff’s intestate collided with a tractor-trailer combine operated by defendant Rockwell on Route 7 in Broome County in the vicinity of Harpursville. Defendant Rockwell owned the tractor. The trailer was owned by Olean and carrying drums of oil on a,ccount of Eastern. Plaintiff’s intestate was killed instantly. The road was slushy, icy and very slippery. There was testimony on the part of the defendant driver that, as he was approaching a stalled automobile on his side of the road and while applying his brakes, his vehicle jackknifed twice. The second time they buckled in such a manner as to put portions of the combined vehicles into the lane and path of decedent’s truck, when the collision occurred. From the record before us it appears that decedent was at all times on his own side of the road and was not guilty of anything in the nature of contributory negligence. The verdict was against and contrary to the weight of the evidence. There should be a new trial. While the affidavits submitted on the motion by reason of a conversation between the court clerk and one of the sitting jurors do not sufficiently establish facts to justify a conclusion *984that the plaintiff was prejudiced thereby, the question becomes academic in the light of the foregoing determination. Nonetheless, and even though it is probable that the clerk and the juror intended no wrong, contacts between court officers and jurors, except as authorized by the court in appropriate circumstances, are not to be countenanced. No justification should be given for arousing suspicions as to the sanctity of jury verdicts. Judgment and order denying the motion to set the verdict aside as against and contrary to the weight of the evidence are reversed, on the facts, and a new trial directed, with costs in this court to the appellant. Foster, P. J., Bergan, Coon, Halpern and Imrie, JJ., concur. [See 283 App. Div. 677.]
§ 19.00 Who shall furnish information. ( a ) *Persons filing cotton-on-call reports.* Merchants and dealers of cotton holding or controlling positions for future delivery in cotton that are reportable pursuant to § 15.00(p)(1)(i) of this chapter shall file CFTC Form 304.
( b ) *Persons responding to a special call.* All persons: Exceeding speculative position limits under § 150.2 of this chapter; or holding or controlling positions for future delivery that are reportable pursuant to § 15.00(p)(1) of this chapter and who have received a special call from the Commission or its designee shall file any pertinent information as instructed in the special call. Filings in response to a special call shall be made within one business day of receipt of the special call unless otherwise specified in the call. Such filing shall be transmitted using the format, coding structure, and electronic data submission procedures approved in writing by the Commission.
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**939 CAF 13-00701**  PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, CARNI, LINDLEY, AND WHALEN, JJ.

IN THE MATTER OF JANET WOODWORTH, PETITIONER-RESPONDENT,

V ORDER
MICHAEL ATKINSON, RESPONDENT, AND DEANNA LOWDEN, RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

DEANNA LOWDEN, RESPONDENT-APPELLANT PRO SE.
PAMELA A. MUNSON, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD, FULTON.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Oswego County (Kimberly M. Seager, J.), entered January 23, 2013 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4. The order denied the objections of respondent Deanna Lowden to an order of a support magistrate.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in the decision at Family Court.

Entered: September 26, 2014 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
**Exhibit 31.1**
**CERTIFICATIONS**
I, Larry W. Denney, Chairman, President, Chief Executive Officer and ChiefFinancial Officer of Biomass Processing Technology, Inc., certify that:
1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of BiomassProcessing Technology, Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows ofthe small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;
4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) forthe small business issuer and I have:
(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, toensure that material information relating to the small business issuer,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this reportis being prepared;
(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report my conclusions aboutthe effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based upon such evaluation; and
(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during the smallbusiness issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small businessissuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the small business issuer’s auditors and theaudit committee of the small business issuer’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions):
(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer’s abilityto record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the small business issuer’sinternal control over financial reporting.        May 21, 2004 /s/ Larry W. Denney   Name:  Larry W. Denney   Title:  Chairman, President, ChiefExecutive Officer and ChiefFinancial Officer(principal executiveofficer and principalfinancial officer)  
18
§ 18.00 Information to be furnished by traders. Every trader who owns, holds or controls, or has held, owned or controlled, a reportable futures or options position in a commodity shall within one business day after a special call upon such trader by the Commission or its designee file reports to the Commission concerning transactions and positions in such futures or options. Reports shall be filed for the period of time that the trader held or controlled a reportable position and shall be prepared and submitted as instructed in the call. The report shall show for each day covered by the report the following information, as specified in the call, separately for each future or option and for each reporting market: ( a ) Open contracts;
( b ) Purchases and sales;
( c ) Delivery notices issued and stopped;
( d ) Purchases and sales of futures for commodities or for derivatives positions; and
( e ) Options exercised.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 3038-0009) [69 FR 76400, Dec. 21, 2004, as amended at 71 FR 37821, July 3, 2006]
Docket No. FAA-2016-5039 Dir ID 2013-NM-148-AD
Exhibit
23




Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm







Board of
Directors and Shareholders


Coachmen
Industries, Inc.





We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 333-52378) pertaining to the Retirement Plan and Trust of Coachmen
Industries, Inc., 2000 Omnibus Stock Incentive Program and Supplemental Deferred
Compensation Plan, Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-59251) pertaining to
the 1994 Omnibus Stock Incentive Program, Registration Statement (Form S-8 No.
2-64572) pertaining to the Employee Stock Purchase Plan of Coachmen Industries,
Inc. and in the related Prospectus of our reports dated February 20, 2008, with
respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Coachmen
Industries, Inc. and subsidiaries and the effectiveness of internal control over
financial reporting of Coachmen Industries, Inc. and subsidiaries included in
this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31,
2007.













/s/ Ernst &
      Young LLP







Grand
Rapids, Michigan


February
25, 2008
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3925 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3925

   To extend temporarily the suspension of duty on Disperse Blue 77.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 7, 2012

   Mr. Watt introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To extend temporarily the suspension of duty on Disperse Blue 77.

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

SECTION 1. DISPERSE BLUE 77.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.03.51 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States is amended by striking ``12/31/2012'' and 
inserting ``12/31/2014''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```