alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# /03B

U.S. DEPARTMENT OFENERGY · WORKSHOP ON ST ANDARDS FORCLOTHES WASHERS U.S. Department ofEnergy 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20585 (Rm. lE-245) December 14 - 15, 1998 Workshop Purpose: The Department is interested in receiving comments and data to improve its preliminary analysis. In particular, the Department is interested in seeking responses to the questions and/or concerns that were addressed in the Supplemental ANOPR. The Department also seeks comments on the methodologies and analyses to be conducted for the NOPR. Workshop Outcomes: To receive comments on the Supplemental ANOPR and receive comments on analyses to be conducted for the NOPR. Proposed Agenda December 14 . 1:00 - 4:00 GRIM Training Session December 15 9:00 - 9:15 Introduction and Review Agenda

·9: 15 - 9:30 Opening remarks and overview ofthe clothes washerrulemaking schedule Break (as appropriate) 9:30 - 11 :30 · Comments and questions pertaining to the Supplemental ANOPR. Suggested topics include the following: • Proposed product classes for products. • Information on national level historical, current, and projections ofwater and sewerrates. • Information relating to the determination ofprice and operating cost elasticities. • Comments on the proposed DOE approach for determining shipments."'·



### 11:30 - 12:00 12:00 - 1:00

1:00 - 4:00 1:00 - 1:30 1:30 - 2:00 2:00- 2:30 2:30- 2:45 2:45 - 3:30 3:30-4:00 4:00-4:30 -continued

### U.S. DEPARTMENT OFENERGY WORKSHOP ON STANDARDS FOR CLOTHESWASHERS

... Comments on the alternative standard scenarios: • The following are examples ofpossible alternative standards scenarios for consideration by the Department: • A moderate standard at an early effective date. Forexample, a level at a 

### 25 percent improvement, effective three years afterthepublication ofthe Final Rule. • A stringent standard, at a later effective date. Forexample, a level at 

### 45 percent improvement effective five years after the publication ofthe Final Rule. • A two phase approach. For example, a level at 

### 20 percent effective three years after the publication ofthe Final Rule (projected effective date

- October, 

### 2002) and a level at

### 40 percent effective eight years after publication ofthe Final Rule.

... Othercomments ( e.g., savings from detergent, additional information on the cost ofunits at the 40% and 45%, retail markup, tub capacity, quality ofdata, accounting for maintenance, repair andwarranty costs in life-cycle-costs, "life"ofappliance used in life-cycle-cost calculation and theuse ofthe AE099 forecast in the analysis) Results ofReverse Engineering: Phase II Lunch (On Your Own) Presentation ofNOPR analyses "' Marginal.energy and waterrates

... National Energy Savings - approaches to determine shipment and elasticity "' Consumer Survey - update Break "' Manufacturer Impact Analysis "' Indirect Employment Environmental Assessment Utility Impact Analysis · SummaryDiscussion and Adjournment

·-·• -**~ --,-r-..,~** ..**,.-:~-.~.--** -- _,,. .,.,.---· - . --·-- ... •
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING

COMMISSION,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

GORDON DRIVER,

 Defendant - Appellant,

 And

AXCESS AUTOMATION, LLC; 

AXCESS FUND MANAGEMENT, LLC,

 Defendants.

No. 12-56521

D.C. No. 8:09-cv-00578-ODW-RZ

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Otis D. Wright II, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted September 23, 2014** 

FILED

OCT 7 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Before: W. FLETCHER, RAWLINSON, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.

Gordon Driver appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in an action

filed by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) for violations of

the Commodity Exchange Act and related regulations arising out of an alleged

Ponzi scheme. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for plain

error a district court’s failure to recuse itself sua sponte pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 455. United States v. Spangle, 626 F.3d 488, 495 (9th Cir. 2010). We affirm. 

The district court did not commit plain error by failing to recuse itself sua

sponte from hearing Driver’s requests to release previously frozen assets and the

CFTC’s motion for summary judgment. See id. (setting forth plain error standard

of review when a party does not seek recusal before the trial court). The isolated

comments by the district court upon which Driver relies to support his arguments

do not establish the bias or partiality warranting recusal. See Liteky v. United

States, 510 U.S. 540, 555 (1994) (“[J]udicial remarks during the course of . . .

[proceedings] that are critical or disapproving of, or even hostile to, counsel, the

parties, or their cases, ordinarily do not support a bias or partiality challenge.”); see

also Clemens v. U.S. Dist. Court for Cent. Dist. of Cal., 428 F.3d 1175, 1178 (9th

Cir. 2005) (per curiam) (in analyzing § 455(a) motions, this court “employ[s] an

objective test: whether a reasonable person with knowledge of all the facts would

2 12-56521
conclude the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned” (citation and

internal quotation marks omitted)). Moreover, “judicial rulings alone almost never

constitute a valid basis for a bias or partiality motion.” Liteky, 510 U.S. at 555. 

To the extent that Driver seeks to challenge the underlying grant of summary

judgment, we do not consider these arguments because they were not distinctly

raised or argued in his opening brief. See Smith v. Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045, 1052

(9th Cir. 1999). 

AFFIRMED.

3 12-56521
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent v. Louis Ferris and Joseph Levin, Appellants.

Motion granted and time for argument of appeal enlarged to include March 1961 Term on condition that appellants’ brief is filed and served on or before February 20, 1961. Respondent directed to file brief on or before March 16, 1961.
#### Westland Garden State Plaza, L.P., Respondent, v EZAT, Inc., Trading as Varizioni, Defendant. Manoucher Hedvat, Nonparty Appellant. Westland Garden State Plaza, Limited Partnership, Respondent, v Hershel Hedvat, Respondent, and Manoucher Hedvat, Appellant.

[833 NYS2d 84]

Orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman J. Cahn, J.), both entered November 25, 2005, which, inter alia, confirmed the report of the special referee finding that the subpoenas at issue had been properly served on appellant and that appellant had deliberately and contumaciously failed to comply with them, and thereupon adjudged appellant in contempt and entitled plaintiff to recover attorneys’ fees and costs, unanimously modified, on the law, to vacate the adjudication of contempt and the relief premised thereon, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

*292The referee’s finding that appellant Hedvat had been properly served with the subpoenas at issue, is supported by the record and was properly confirmed *(Nager v Panadis,*238 AD2d 135 [1997]). However, the issue of whether Hedvat’s noncompliance with the subpoenas constituted contempt was not referred to the referee *(see*CPLR 4212, 4311) and was not properly passed on by him and, accordingly, the referee’s finding on that issue was not a proper basis for the court’s adjudication of contempt against Hedvat. The elements of civil contempt *(see Matter of Fishel v New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal,*172 AD2d 835 [1991]) in this matter involving nonjudicial subpoenas, were, in any event, not made out before the referee, and, even if they had been, the adjudication against Hedvat would still have been infirm since Hedvat was not afforded proper notice of and a hearing on the issue. It follows that there is no basis for an award of attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to Judiciary Law § 773. Concur—Tom, J.P., Marlow, Nardelli, Gonzalez and Kavanagh, JJ.
### §100102. Definitions

In this title:

(1) Director.—The term "Director" means the Director of the National Park Service.

(2) National park system.—The term "National Park System" means the areas of land and water described in section 100501 of this title.

(3) Secretary.—The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of the Interior.

(4) Service.—The term "Service" means the National Park Service.

(5) System.—The term "System" means the National Park System.

(6) System unit.—The term "System unit" means one of the areas described in section 100501 of this title.

(Pub. L. 113–287, §3, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3096.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 100102 | no source. | |

Section

The term "System unit" is added because various laws relating to the National Park Service apply to any area of land or water administered by the Secretary through the Service regardless of the terms used in those laws. See section 100501 of the revised title.

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

#### Definitions

Pub. L. 114–289, §2, Dec. 16, 2016, 130 Stat. 1482, provided that: "In this Act [see Short Title of 2016 Amendment note set out under section 100101 of this title]:

"(1) Challenge fund.—The term 'Challenge Fund' means the National Park Centennial Challenge Fund established in title I [enacting chapter 1035 of this title and amending section 6804 of Title 16, Conservation].

"(2) Director.—The term 'Director' means the Director of the National Park Service.

"(3) Endowment.—The term 'Endowment' means the Second Century Endowment for the National Park Service established by title II [see Short Title of 2016 Amendment note set out under section 100101 of this title].

"(4) Secretary.—The term 'Secretary' means the Secretary of the Interior.

"(5) Signature project or program.—The term 'signature project or program' means any project or program identified by the Secretary as one that will help prepare the national parks for another century of conservation, preservation, and visitor enjoyment."
#### PRAY v. TODD et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

February 24, 1905.)

Action by John A. Pray against Louis L. Todd, impleaded. No opinion. Motion dismissed.
#### § 947.702 Exemption for coal extraction incidental to the extraction of other minerals.

Part 702 of this chapter, *Exemption for Coal Extraction Incidental to the Extraction of Other Minerals,* shall apply to any person who conducts coal extraction incidental to the extraction of other minerals for purposes of commercial use or sale.

[54 FR 52123, Dec. 20, 1989]
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________ No. 17

- 13322 Non

- Argument Calendar

________________________ D.C. Docket No. 2:15

- cr - 00335

- RDP

- TFM

- 3

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff

- Appellee,

versus JOSHUA JARRELL JACKSON, a.k.a. "Bam" or "Bam Bam", Defendant

- Appellant.

________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama

________________________ (May 17, 2018) Before TJOFLAT , WILLIAM PRYOR and NEWSOM , Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:

Case: 17-13322 Date Filed: 05/17/2018 Page: 1 of 22 Joshua Jackson appeals the mandatory statutory minimum sentence of 240 month s that he received after e nter ing conditional pleas of guilty to tampering with a witness , 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 1512(b)(3), and to conspir ing to distribute and possess with intent to distribute more than 5 kilograms of co caine , 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(b)(1)(A), 846. Jackson challenge s the enhancement of his sentence based

on his youthful offender adjudication in an Alabama court. Id. § 841 (b)(1)(A)

. We affirm. Jackson ’ s argument is foreclosed by our precedents. We held in United States v. Elliott , 732 F.3d 1307 (11th Cir. 2013) , that “ a youthful offender who pled guilty and was adjudicated must also be considered to have sustained a conviction for purposes of the Guidelines career offender enhancement, even if state law does not consider him ‘ convicted. ’ ” Id. at 1313. And a state adjudication that “is considered a ‘ conviction ’ for purposes of career offender status . . . [is] also

. . . considered a ‘ conviction ’ for purposes of enhancement under 21 U.S.C. § 841. ” United States v. Fernandez , 58 F.3d 593, 599 (11th Cir. 1995)

. Our prior precedent rule requires that we follow binding circuit precedent unless and until it is overruled by this Court en banc or by the Supreme Court

. United States v. Cruickshank , 837 F.3d 1182, 1187 (11th Cir. 2016)

. We AFFIRM Jackson’s senten ce. Case: 17-13322 Date Filed: 05/17/2018 Page: 2 of 2
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 15-19

The Detroit Edison Company
Detroit, Michigan

We have made a review, in accordance with standards established by the American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants, of the unaudited interim financial
information of The Detroit Edison Company and subsidiaries for the periods ended
September 30, 2001 and 2000, as indicated in our report dated November 13, 2001;
because we did not perform an audit, we expressed no opinion on that
information.

We are aware that our report referred to above, which is included in your
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2001, is
incorporated by reference in Registration Statement No.333-63366 on Form S-3.

We also are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under
the Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration
Statement prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or
certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.


Deloitte & Touche LLP

November 13, 2001
#### § 57.19121 Recordkeeping.

At the time of completion, the person performing inspections, tests, and maintenance of shafts and hoisting equipment required in standard 57.19120 shall certify, by signature and date, that they have been done. A record of any part that is not functioning properly shall be made and dated. Certifications and records shall be retained for one year.

(Sec. 101, Pub. L. 91-173 as amended by Pub. L. 95-164, 91 Stat. 1291 (30 U.S.C. 811))

[50 FR 4082, Jan. 29, 1985, as amended at 60 FR 33722, June 29, 1995]
### §21134. Effective date; transition

#### (a) Effective date

This subchapter and the amendments made by this subchapter shall take effect upon the appointment of all members of the Election Assistance Commission under section 20923 of this title.

#### (b) Transition

With the consent of the entity involved, the Election Assistance Commission is authorized to utilize the services of such officers, employees, and other personnel of the entities from which functions have been transferred to the Election Assistance Commission under this subchapter or the amendments made by this subchapter for such period of time as may reasonably be needed to facilitate the orderly transfer of such functions.

#### (c) No effect on authorities of Office of Election Administration prior to appointment of members of Commission

During the period which begins on October 29, 2002, and ends on the effective date described in subsection (a), the Office of Election Administration of the Federal Election Commission shall continue to have the authority to carry out any of the functions (including the development of voluntary standards for voting systems and procedures for the certification of voting systems) which it has the authority to carry out as of October 29, 2002.

(Pub. L. 107–252, title VIII, §804, Oct. 29, 2002, 116 Stat. 1726.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This subchapter, referred to in subsecs. (a) and (b), was in the original "this title", meaning title VIII of Pub. L. 107–252, Oct. 29, 2002, 116 Stat. 1725. For complete classification of title VIII to the Code, see Tables.

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 15534 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTINGFIRM**

**THE BOARD OF DIRECTORSIMCLONE SYSTEMS INCORPORATED:**

Weconsent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements on Form S-3(File Nos. 333-49578, 333-22341, 333-87489, 333-117968,333-37746, 333-07339, 333-21417, 333-39067 and 333-67335)and Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-38620, 333-10275, 033-95894,333-64825, 333-64827, 333-117995, 333-30172, 333-68534and 333-101492) of ImClone Systems Incorporated of our reports dated March 15,2006, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of ImClone SystemsIncorporated and subsidiary as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and therelated consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity (deficit)and comprehensive income (loss), and cash flows for each of the years in thethree-year period ended December 31, 2005, management’s assessment of theeffectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31,2005 and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31,2005, which reports appear in the December 31, 2005 annual report on Form 10-Kof ImClone Systems Incorporated.
|                       | **/s/ KPMG LLP** |
|-----------------------|------------------|
| Princeton, New Jersey |
| March 15, 2006   |

 

----
PUBLIC LAW 115–136—MAR. 16, 2018 132 STAT. 343 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 3656: 

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 115–387 (Comm. on Veterans’ Affairs). 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD: 

Vol. 163 (2017): Nov. 6, considered and passed House. 

Vol. 164 (2018): Mar. 1, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 115–136 

115th Congress 

An Act 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for a consistent eligibility date 

for provision of Department of Veterans Affairs memorial headstones and markers 

for eligible spouses and dependent children of veterans whose remains are unavailable. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. ELIGIBILITY OF VETERANS’ SPOUSES AND DEPENDENT 

CHILDREN WHOSE REMAINS ARE UNAVAILABLE FOR 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS MEMORIAL 

HEADSTONES AND MARKERS. 

Section 2306(b)(2) of title 38, United States Code, is amended— 

(1) in subparagraph (B), by striking ‘‘The’’ and inserting 

‘‘An individual who dies on or after November 11, 1998, who 

is the’’; and 

(2) in subparagraph (C), by striking ‘‘An’’ and inserting 

‘‘An individual who dies on or after November 11, 1998, who 

is an’’. 

Approved March 16, 2018. 

Mar. 16, 2018 

[H.R. 3656]
#### PEOPLE ex rel. DONOVAN, Respondent, v. CANTOR et al., Appellants.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

October 16, 1903.)

Proceeding by the people, on the relation of Bartholomew Donovan, against Jacob A. Cantor, individually, etc., and others.

No opinion. Motion to dismiss appeal granted, with $10 costs.
2 Attachments 

Brenda, 

Here is the data that was discussed last week. I am still working on the additional request from the Friday 

conference call and will send once I have it together. My team is more than willing to collaborate with you and 

support any additional questions that you may have.

Best regards, 

Jerry C. Duke, Jr.

Environmental Team Leader 

Texas City Refinery Direct: (409) 942-4883 Mobile: (409) 771-0751 

Be sure to visit the Environmental Team Share Point site https://wss2.bp.com/TexasCity/Environmental 

In the words of Henry Ford: "Whether you think that you can or you can't, you're usually right." 

DIAL Data 

Duke, Jerry 

to: 

Brenda Shine, Hermanson, Robert W 

12/17/2008 06:32 PM 

Hide Details 

From: "Duke, Jerry" <Jerry.Duke@bp.com> 

To: Brenda Shine/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, "Hermanson, Robert W" 

<robert.hermanson@bp.com> 

History: This message has been replied to and forwarded. 

BP Tank data.xls DIAL wwtp data.xls

DIAL Data Page 1 of 2

file://C:\Documents and Settings\bshine\Local Settings\Temp\notes87944B\~web3201.htm 1/24/2013
. <<BP Tank data.xls>> <<DIAL wwtp data.xls>> 

DIAL Data Page 2 of 2

file://C:\Documents and Settings\bshine\Local Settings\Temp\notes87944B\~web3201.htm 1/24/2013
### §308603. Authority to make grants

(a) In General.—The Secretary may make grants to other Federal agencies, State, local, and Tribal governments, other public entities, educational institutions, historic preservation groups, and private nonprofit organizations in accordance with this chapter for—

(1) the identification of historic African-American burial grounds that may qualify for the Program;

(2) the preservation and restoration of African-American burial grounds;

(3) the interpretation of African-American burial grounds; and

(4) related research and documentation for historic African-American burial grounds.

(b) Funding.—

(1) In general.—There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section $3,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2023 through 2027.

(2) Availability.—Any amounts made available for a fiscal year under paragraph (1) that are not used during that fiscal year shall be available for use under this section during any subsequent fiscal year.

(Added Pub. L. 117–328, div. DD, title VI, §643(a), Dec. 29, 2022, 136 Stat. 5613.)
#### In the Matter of Morris Levine, an Attorney, Respondent. Association of the Bar of the City of New York, Petitioner.

First Department,

December 15, 1960.

*Eric Nightingale*for petitioner.

*Leonard Feldman (Benjamin Levin*with him on the brief), for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

The respondent has been convicted, on his plea of guilty, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, upon two counts of an indictment charging him with violation of subdivision (b) of section 145 of title 26 of the United States Code (now and since 1954 being U. S. Code, tit. 26, § 7201) of willfully and knowingly attempting to evade and defeat a large part of the income tax due and owing by him to the United States of America for the calendar years 1951 and 1952 by filing and causing to be filed false and fraudulent income tax returns for such years.

*73The respondent, upon his conviction was sentenced to a prison term of one year on each count, the execution of which sentence was suspended, and he was fined the sum of $10,000 on each count of the indictment, which fine was to be paid within a period of two years. Filing false and fraudulent income tax returns is a felony under the Federal law, but convictions of this nature are only misdemeanors under the State law.

Under the circumstances, respondent has violated the following Canons of Professional Ethics, to wit:

Canon 29 of the Canons of Professional Ethics which reads, in part: ‘ ‘ He should strive at all times to uphold the honor and to maintain the dignity of the profession and to improve not only the law but the administration of justice.”

Canon 32 of the Canons of Professional Ethics which reads, in part: “ He must also observe and advise his client to observe the statute law

The respondent is, therefore, adjudged guilty of professional misconduct, and considering his otherwise satisfactory record and long service at the Bar he should be suspended only for a period of one year.

Botein, P. J., Breitel, Stevens, Eager and Noonan, JJ., concur.

Respondent suspended for a period of one year.