alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO, CSBN 44332

United States Attorney

LUCILLE GONZALES MEIS, SBN CO 15153

Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX

Social Security Administration

ARMAND D. ROTH

Special Assistant United States Attorney

California Bar No. 214624

333 Market Street, Suite 1500

San Francisco, CA 94105

Telephone: (415) 977-8924

Fax: (415) 744-0134

E-Mail: Armand.Roth@ssa.gov

Attorneys for Defendant

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

CHHORT KHUT, )) Plaintiff, ) CIVIL NO. 09-cv-00673-EDL ) v. ) STIPULATION AND ORDER AWARDING

 ) ATTORNEY FEES UNDER THE EQUAL

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, ) ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (28 U.S.C. 

Commissioner of Social Security, ) § 2412(d)) ) Defendant. ) 

______________________________)

Case 3:09-cv-00673-EDL Document 24 Filed 03/29/10 Page 1 of 2 Case3:09-cv-00673-EDL Document23 Filed03/23/10 Page1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

-2-

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by the parties, through their undersigned counsel, subject to the

approval of the Court, that Plaintiff be awarded attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act in the

amount of FIVE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS AND NO CENTS ($5,500.00). This

amount represents compensation for all legal services rendered on behalf of Plaintiff by counsel in

connection with this civil action for services performed before the district court in accordance with

28 U.S.C. § 2412(d).

This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Plaintiff's request for EAJA attorney fees

and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of Defendant under the EAJA. Payment in

the aforementioned sum under EAJA shall constitute a complete release from and bar to any and all

claims, rights, causes of action, liens or subrogated interests relating to attorneys fees and costs incurred

in this action under EAJA.

The settlement of Plaintiff’s claim for EAJA attorney fees does not preclude Plaintiff’s counsel

from seeking attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) of the Social Security Act, subject to the offset

provisions of the law.

Respectfully submitted,

Dated March 23, 2010 /s/ Doris Ng

(As authorized via email of 3/18/2010) 

DORIS NG

Attorney for Plaintiff

JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO

United States Attorney

LUCILLE GONZALES MEIS

Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX

Dated:March 23, 2010 By: /s/ Armand Roth

Special Assistant United States Attorney

IT IS SO ORDERED:

Dated: ------------------------------------------------- 

THE HONORABLE ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case3:09-cv-00673-EDL Document23 Filed03/23/10 Page2 of 2

March 29, 2010

Case 3:09-cv-00673-EDL Document 24 Filed 03/29/10 Page 2 of 2
§ 115.302 Capacity building funds. ( a ) Capacity building (CB) funds are funds that HUD may provide to an agency with interim certification.
( b ) CB funds will be provided in a fixed annual amount to be utilized for the eligible activities established pursuant to § 115.303. When the fixed annual amount will not adequately compensate an agency in its first year of participation in the FHAP due to the large number of fair housing complaints that the agency reasonably anticipates processing, HUD may provide the agency with additional funds.
( c ) HUD may provide CB funds during an agency's first three years of participation in the FHAP. However, in the second and third year of the agency's participation in the FHAP, HUD has the option to permit the agency to receive contribution funds under § 115.304, instead of CB funds.
( d ) In order to receive CB funding, agencies must submit a statement of work prior to the signing of the cooperative agreement. The statement of work must identify: ( 1 ) The objectives and activities to be carried out with the CB funds received;
( 2 ) A plan for training all of the agency's employees involved in the administration of the agency's fair housing law;
( 3 ) A statement of the agency's intention to participate in HUD-sponsored training in accordance with the training requirements set out in the cooperative agreement;
( 4 ) A description of the agency's complaint processing data and information system, or, alternatively, whether the agency plans to use CB funds to purchase and install a data system;
( 5 ) A description of any other fair housing activities that the agency will undertake with its CB funds. All such activities must address matters affecting fair housing enforcement that are cognizable under the Fair Housing Act. Any activities that do not address the implementation of the agency's fair housing law, and that are therefore not cognizable under the Fair Housing Act, will be disapproved.
#### § 92.86 Consular responsibility for serving subpoenas.

When directed by the Department of State, officers of the Foreign Service will serve a subpoena issued by a court of the United States on a national or resident of the United States who is in a foreign country unless such action is prohibited by the law of the foreign country.

[32 FR 11776, Aug. 16, 1967]
From: Dines, Jennifer [ mailto:Jennifer.Dines@epa.state.oh.us ]

Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 7:02 AM

To: Aburano, Douglas

Subject: PM2.5 Redesignation Supplementa l Inventory Information for Ohio

Attachments: Canton winsum_OH cy 2007.xlsx

Parkersburg winsum_OH cy 2007.xlsx

Steubenville winsum_OH cy 2007.xlsx

Cleveland winsum_OH cy 2007.xlsx

Columbus winsum_OH cy 2007.xlsx

wheeling winsum_OH cy 2007.xlsx

Dayton winsum_OH cy 2007.xlsx

winsum__allstates.state.2005.csv

winsum__allstates.state.2007.csv

winsum__allstates.state.2018.csv

Doug, in addition to the inventories we have already submitted for direct PM, NOx and SO2, we are submitting

the attached inventory information for ammonia and VOCs as a supplement. This data was generated from

LADCO county level VOC and ammonia emissions inventories for 2007. I have attached the complete files as

well as files with only information for the nonattainment area counties. The following links are associated with

the attached inventories: inventory page ( http://www.ladco.org/tech/emis/current/index.php ), the county

specific file ( http://www.ladco.org/tech/emis/basecv 8/annual/winsum__allstates.cy.2007.csv ) and the

inventory documentation

( http://www.ladco.org/tech/emis/basecv8/Ba se_C_Emissions_Documentation_Sept_12.pdf

With the supplement of these inventories, Ohio should now meet the comprehensive emissions inventory

requirement of the Clean Air Act as it applies to ammonia and VOCs for the Ohio nonattainment areas.

Thank you, Jennifer



### Jennifer Dines

Manager, State Implementation Plan and Rulemaking Section

Division of Air Pollution Control

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency

Wk (614) 644

‐ 3696

Fax (614) 644

‐ 3681
BEFORE THE 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

__________________________________________ 

 ) 

Benjamin Edelman, ) 

 third-party complainant ) 

 ) 

v. ) Docket OST-2013-0027 

 ) 

Cathay Pacific Airways Limited ) 

__________________________________________) 

UNCONTESTED MOTION OF CATHAY PACIFIC 

AIRWAYS LIMITED FOR EXTENSION OF TIME 

TO ANSWER THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT 

Communications with respect to this document should be sent to: 

John R. Mietus, Jr. 

Law Office of John Mietus, LLC

6701 Democracy Blvd., Suite 300 

Bethesda, MD 20817-7500

(202) 747-5212 

(240) 396-5362 fax 

john@mietuslaw.com 

Counsel for CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS 

LIMITED

February 14, 2013
BEFORE THE 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

__________________________________________ 

 ) 

Benjamin Edelman, ) 

 third-party complainant ) 

 ) 

v. ) Docket OST-2013-0027 

 ) February 14, 2013 

Cathay Pacific Airways Limited ) 

__________________________________________) 

UNCONTESTED MOTION OF CATHAY PACIFIC 

AIRWAYS LIMITED FOR EXTENSION OF TIME 

TO ANSWER THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT 

 Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 302.405, Cathay Pacific Airways Limited 

respectfully moves for an extension of time until March 8, 2013 to answer the 

third-party complaint filed in the above-captioned docket. On February 14, 

2013 Cathay Pacific discussed this motion with Complainant, who advised 

that he has no objection to the proposed extension. 

Cathay Pacific submits that good cause exists to grant this 

uncontested motion. Travel of Cathay Pacific staff in Hong Kong for the 

Lunar New Year holiday, and upcoming travel by counsel for Cathay Pacific, 

will limit Cathay’s ability to adequately develop an answer by the current 

due date. Coordination with third parties -- the complaint relates to displays 

generated by oneworld – will also require additional time. The brief 

extension requested by Cathay will permit Cathay to fully develop its answer 

and would not otherwise unduly delay this proceeding.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, September 22, 2017. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, September 22, 2017 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following orderA17A1720. HERITAGE HEALTHCARE OF GRIFFIN, LLC n/k/a PRUITTHEALGRIFFIN, LLC et al. v. IDA J. HARDEN, AS ATTORNEY-IN-FACT FOR EUGENE HARDEN.
Upon consideration of the APPELLANT'S motion FOR PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THE APPEAL in the above styled case, it is ordered that the motion is hereby GRANTED.
### §5049. Prohibition of Federal control of educational institution or school system

Nothing contained in this chapter shall be construed to authorize any department, agency, officer, or employee of the United States to exercise any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any education institution or school system.

(Pub. L. 93–113, title IV, §409, Oct. 1, 1973, 87 Stat. 410.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This chapter, referred to in text, was in the original "this Act", meaning Pub. L. 93–113, Oct. 1, 1973, 87 Stat. 394, known as the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973, which is classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 4950 of this title and Tables.
### §8231. Grants for energy conserving improvements; establishment of standards; authorization of appropriations

(1) The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development is authorized to make grants to finance energy conserving improvements (as defined in subparagraph (2) of the last paragraph of section 1703(a) of title 12) to projects which are financed with loans under section 1701q of title 12, or which are subject to mortgages insured under section 1715l(d)(3) or section 1715z–1 of title 12. The Secretary shall make assistance available under this section on a priority basis to those projects which are in financial difficulty as a result of high energy costs. In carrying out the program authorized by this section, the Secretary shall issue regulations requiring that any grant made under this section shall be made only on the condition that the recipient of such grant shall take steps (prescribed by the Secretary) to assure that the benefits derived from such grants in terms of lower energy costs shall accrue to tenants in the form of lower rentals or to the Federal Government in the form of a lower operating subsidy if such a subsidy is being paid to such recipient.

(2) The Secretary shall establish minimum standards for energy conserving improvements to multifamily dwelling units to be assisted under this section.

(3) There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out the provisions of this section not to exceed $25,000,000.

(Pub. L. 95–619, title II, §251(b), Nov. 9, 1978, 92 Stat. 3235; Pub. L. 105–388, §5(c)(3), Nov. 13, 1998, 112 Stat. 3479.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1998—Par. (1). Pub. L. 105–388 inserted closing parenthesis after "section 1703(a) of title 12" and substituted "accrue" for "accure".
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN RE 

CHARLES SCHWAB CORPORATION 

SECURITIES LITIGATION.

 /

This Document Relates To All Cases.

 /

No. C 08-01510 WHA

ORDER RE COUNSELS’

AVAILABILITY FOR

HEARING RE PRIVILEGED

DOCUMENTS

Are counsel available for an impromptu hearing on Wednesday, February 24, 2010, at

11:00 a.m. or 1:30 p.m. to assist the Court in its review of the ten “privileged” documents? Of

course, plaintiffs’ counsel will not be able to see the documents but they may be able to shed light

regarding the privilege issue. Please inform Deputy Clerk Dawn Toland whether counsel are

available by 4:00 p.m. today. Ms. Toland can be reached at 415-522-2020.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 23, 2010. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:08-cv-01510-WHA Document 423 Filed 02/23/10 Page 1 of 1
Martin, Michael (OST) 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Attachments: 

Everyone: 

Martin, Michael (OST) 

Tuesday, June 24, 2014 2:54 PM 

John Guimond Qohn.guimond@augustaairport.org); Jeff Northgc~ves 

Unorthgraves@knoxcountymaine.gov); Roger J. Katz (roger.katz@(lugustamaine.gov); 

Deborah E. McNeil (deb.mcneil@yahoo.com) ········ , .. 

Andrew Bonney; Schlemmer, Kevin (OST); Harvey, Caitlin (OST) J 

Essential Air Service at Augusta and Rockland 

Cape Air AUG and RKD EAS Proposal 23JUN14.pdf 

I would like to update you on the Essential Air Service (EAS) situation at Augusta and Rockland, and give you an 

opportunity to offer any comments on the record before we submit a recommendation to the Assistant Secretary for 

Aviation and International Affairs. We issued Order 2014-5-8 (May 21, 2014), requesting proposals from airlines 

interested in providing EAS for a new term. In response to our request, Cape Air, the incumbent, was the only airline to 

submit a proposal. 

I have attached Cape Air's proposal for your review and it also been uploaded www.regulations.gov under Docket 

number DOT-OST-1997-2784. I request that you review the proposal and submit any comments you may have as soon 

as possible, but no later than Tuesday, July 15. Please send your comments directly to me via e-mail at 

michael.f.martin@dot.gov. Also, please forward this e-mail to all relevant parties that I have not included on the 

distribution list. 

If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. 

Regards, 

Michael Martin 

United States Department of Transportation 

Essential Air Service (EAS) and Small Community Air Service Development Program (SCASDP) 

(202) 366-6494 

1
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

BARRY J. PORTMAN

Federal Public Defender

ELIZABETH M. FALK

Assistant Federal Public Defender

450 Golden Gate Avenue

San Francisco, CA 94102

Telephone: (415) 436-7700

Counsel for Defendant MONDRAGON

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

AMALIA MONDRAGON,

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CR 09-910 VRW

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER CONTINUING

SENTENCING

Date: March 11, 2010

Time: 2:00 p.m.

Court: The Honorable Vaughn R.

Walker

STIPULATION

The parties agree to continue the sentencing in the above-captioned matter from March 11,

2010 until April 1, 2010 at 2:00 p.m. The purpose of the continuance is due to the fact that defense

counsel has scheduled minor surgery for March 9, 2010, and is unsure that she will be able to attend

court and effectively defend her client at sentencing on March 11, 2010. After conferring with the

parties and their respective schedules, the parties have agreed to appear on April 1, 2010 for

sentencing with the Court’s permission.

Assistant United States Attorney Benjamin Tolkoff has no objection to continuing the

sentencing to April 1, 2010, as evidenced by his signature at the conclusion of this stipulation. 

Moreover, United States Probation Officer Brian Casai has been contacted by defense counsel, and 

\\

\\

Case 3:09-cr-00910-VRW Document 21 Filed 02/23/10 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

STIP & ORDER CONTINUING

SENTENCING - 09-910 VRW - 2 -

has no objection to continuing the sentencing to April 1, 2010 at 2:00 p.m.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

DATED: 2/19/10 _____/S/______________________________

ELIZABETH M. FALK

Assistant Federal Public Defender

DATED: 2/19/10 ____/S/_________________________________

BENJAMIN TOLKOFF

Assistant United States Attorney

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Based upon the aforementioned representations of the parties, it is hereby ORDERED that the

sentencing in this matter be continued from March 11, 2010 to April 1, 2010 at 2:00 p.m. It is further

ORDERED that the Final Presentence Report is due to this Court no later than March 18, 2010

DATED: ______________________ ___________________________________________

THE HONORABLE VAUGHN R. WALKDER

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

2/23/2010 

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Vaughn R Walker

Case 3:09-cr-00910-VRW Document 21 Filed 02/23/10 Page 2 of 2
#### § 1000.420 May grants made by HUD under section 603 of NAHASDA be used to pay net interest costs incurred when issuing notes or other obligations?

Yes. Other costs that can be paid using grant funds include but are not limited to the costs of servicing and trust administration, and other costs associated with financing of debt obligations, not to exceed 30 percent of the net interest cost.
### §7294. Incidental transfers

The Director of the Office of Management and Budget, in consultation with the Secretary and the Commission, is authorized and directed to make such determinations as may be necessary with regard to the transfer of functions which relate to or are utilized by an agency, commission or other body, or component thereof affected by this chapter, to make such additional incidental dispositions of personnel, assets, liabilities, contracts, property, records, and unexpended balances of appropriations, authorizations, allocations, and other funds held, used, arising from, available to or to be made available in connection with the functions transferred by this chapter, as he may deem necessary to accomplish the purposes of this chapter.

(Pub. L. 95–91, title VII, §704, Aug. 4, 1977, 91 Stat. 606.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This chapter, referred to in text, was in the original "this Act", meaning Pub. L. 95–91, Aug. 4, 1977, 91 Stat. 565, known as the Department of Energy Organization Act, which is classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 7101 of this title and Tables.
#### In the Matter of Jared G., Appellant. Niagara County Attorney, Respondent.

(Appeal No. 1.)

[834 NYS2d 601]—

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Niagara County (David E. Seaman, J), entered February 9, 2006 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3. The order directed respondent to pay restitution in the amount of $1,200 within six months of the date of the order.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously modified on the law by vacat*1249ing the amount of restitution and as modified the order is affirmed without costs, and the matter is remitted to Family Court, Niagara County, for a new restitution hearing.

Memorandum: Respondents were adjudicated juvenile delinquents based on findings that they committed acts that, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of criminal mischief in the third degree (Penal Law § 145.05 [2]). By the orders on appeal, Family Court ordered each respondent, respectively, to pay restitution with respect to the 14 vehicles for which the victim made claims for damages. That was error. Pursuant to Penal Law § 60.27, restitution with respect to 14 vehicles, rather than the five vehicles charged in each petition, would be permissible because the damage to the additional nine vehicles was “part of the same criminal transaction” (§ 60.27 [4] [a]; *see generally People v Dorsey,*26 AD3d 800 [2006], *lv denied*6 NY3d 833 [2006]). There is, however, no parallel provision in Family Court Act § 353.6, which governs restitution in juvenile delinquency matters, and the parties’ contentions concerning Penal Law § 60.27 therefore are irrelevant. We agree with respondents that restitution should be limited to those items recited in the petitions *(see*Family Ct Act § 353.6 [1] [a]; *see generally Matter of Joel M.,*240 AD2d 747 [1997]; *Matter of Kerry E.,*161 AD2d 843 [1990]). Because we are unable to determine the proper amount of restitution on the record before us *(cf. Matter of Lamedh B.,*299 AD2d 966 [2002]), we therefore modify the order in each appeal by vacating the amount of restitution, and we remit the matters to Family Court for a new restitution hearing. Present—Hurlbutt, J.P., Gorski, Smith, Fahey and Green, JJ.
**MEMORANDUM**

DATE: November 20 , 2012 TO: RI CE NESHAP Docket, EPA - HQ - OAR - 2008 - 0708 FROM: Melanie King, EPA OAQPS/SPPD/ESG SUBJECT: November 19 , 2012 Meeting Regarding Proposed Amendments to the RI CE

NESHAP and RI CE NESHAP/NSPS Implementation Q&A Document **SUMMARY** A meeting was held between the EPA and the attendees listed below on November 19 , 2012 to discuss IN GAA’s comments on the proposed amendments to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (R IC E ), the rulemaking schedule, and the Questions and Answers Document published in July 2012 . The amendments were proposed on June 7, 2012. The meeting agenda is attached. **ATTENDEES** Bob Wayland, EPA Lisa Beal , INGAA Melanie King, EPA Jim McCarthy , IES Michael Horowitz, EPA (by phone) Charles Wait, Energy Transfer

### Agenda Interstate Natural Gas Association of America and EPA Meeting on RICE NESHAP Status and Implementation Q&A Document

12:30 – 1:00, Monday , November 19 , 2012 1. RI CE NESHAP Rulemaking Schedule Status (December 14, 2012 signature deadline) • Comments received and implications for schedule and final rule content 2. IN GAA Comments on Proposed Subpart ZZZZ • Any EPA questions on INGAA Comments? • IN GAA comments 6 and 7 on emergency engines
– operator defined procedures for maintenance tests and readiness testing; “deviation” from 100 hour operating limit. • Potential for other minor technical corrections (INGAA comment 9 )
– several items listed, including SSMP, onsite records, ΔP measurements, etc. 3. EPA RI CE NESHAP and NSPS Implementation Q&A Document • Potential for additional EPA revisions to the document
– INGAA may provide comments and list additional items that could b e added to facilitate implementation • Example I

NGAA issues:

- IN GAA August 9 comments did not address “onsite buildings” for remote engine definition. Will this be addressed in Final Rule or in Q&A document?

- Q&A #21 and inconsistencies with ty pical CPMS programming for units complying with Subpart ZZZZ.

- Q&A #12 appears to conflict with §63.10(b) and minor rule revision may be warranted
– see INGAA comment 9 regarding onsite records

- Several Q&A’s related to ΔP measurement, and timing and approval process for catal ys t replacement tests and temporary catal ys ts 4. Plans for any “next steps” (e.g., INGAA comments on Q&A document) Planned INGAA Attendees Lisa Beal Charles Wait (Energy

Transfer) Jim McCarthy (IES Inc.)