alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 552.58 Other transactions.

Commercial transactions with other than individuals (such as nonappropriated fund activities) are restricted to the office of the custodian of the specific fund activity. Business will be conducted during normal duty hours.
P. 1


# OAR Box 1500 Prepped byOllie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 24 ) ll-C-5 0 Docket Number: 

# A-94-5 2

Printed 8/5/20081:51:27

PM Sheet 24of 343•4.4= 0 ST*, .



### \~o*f U J

o P. 2 

### A-94-52 UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y RESEARC H TRIANGL E PARK , N C 2771 1

JA N I 3 I99 7 OFFIC E O F AI R QUALITYPLANNIN G AN D STANDARD S Ms . GlynnRountre e Aerospac e Industrie s Associatio n 125 0 Eye Street , N W Washington , D C 20005-392 2 Dea r Glynn : '0OC<<7T Thi s i s i nrespons e t o you r Decembe r 20 , 199 6 reques t fo r clarificatio no f th e intende d scop e o f th e Nationa l Emissio n Standard s fo r Hazardou s Ai r Pollutant s (NESHAP ) fo r reinforce d plasti c composite s production . Th e analysi s fo r thi s standar d ha s focuse d o nstyrene-containing resin s an d ge l coats , including polyeste r and viny l este r resins . Whil e w e hav e no t ye t define d applicabilit yfo r th e NESHAP , w e woul d envisio na t thi s poin t tha t epox

yresin s tha t d o no t contai nstyren e o r significan t amount s o f othe r hazardou s ai r pollutant s (HAP ) woul d no t b e covered . However , aerospac e facilitie s tha t us e styrene containin g resin s mayb e affecte d bythi s rule . W e hav e requeste d informatio nfromindividua l aerospac e companie s o n reinforce d plasti c operations . W e woul d appreciat e an y assistanc e yo u coul d provid e t o hel p defin e th e exten t t o whic h styren e o r othe r HA P ar e emitte d fromreinforce d plastic s operation s i nth e aerospac e industry . A s yo u ca nimagine , th e reinforce d plastic s NESHAP cover s a wid e rang e o f industria l processe s and markets . Therefore , ou r primar ycommunicatio nwit hindustrystakeholder s ha s bee nthrough th e broad-base d trad e association s o f th e Societ yo f the Plastic s Industryan

d th e Composit e Fabricator s Association . W e als o welcom e inpu t and participatio nfrom th e Aerospac e Industrie s Association . Th e projec t lead fo r th e reinforce d plastic s NESHA P i s Madelein e Strum . Yo u maycontac t he r a t (919 ) 541-238 3 i f yo u hav e an

yquestion s regarding th e developmen t o f thi s NESHAP . Als o fee l fre e t o contac t th e Group Leade r fo r th e Coating s an d Consume r Product s Group , Lind a Herring , a t (919 ) 541-5358 .

Recycled/Recyclabl e •Printe d wit h Vegetabl e Oi l Base d Ink s o n 100 % Recycle d Pape r(40 % Postconsumer ) /P. 3

I hop e thi s informatio nha s bee nhelpfu l t o you . I f yo u shoul d requir e furthe r assistance , pleas e contac t th e above
mentione d member s o f m ystaf f o r cal l me directl ya t (919 ) 541-5572 . Sincerely ,
J^^Brtife e2

TJorda n Directo r Emissio nStandard s Divisio n



### <3 L
### §2667. Regulations

The Secretary may issue such regulations as the Secretary determines necessary to carry out the provisions of this subchapter.

(Pub. L. 92–419, title V, §507, as added Pub. L. 97–98, title XIV, §1444(a), Dec. 22, 1981, 95 Stat. 1326; amended Pub. L. 115–334, title VI, §6101(a)(3)(B), Dec. 20, 2018, 132 Stat. 4727.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 2667, Pub. L. 92–419, title V, §507, Aug. 30, 1972, 86 Stat. 674; Pub. L. 95–113, title XIV, §1442, Sept. 29, 1977, 91 Stat. 1006; Pub. L. 96–355, §4(4), Sept. 24, 1980, 94 Stat. 1174, set forth definitions for purposes of this subchapter, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 97–98, title XIV, §1444(a), Dec. 22, 1981, 95 Stat. 1326.

Provisions similar to those comprising this section were contained in former section 2668 of this title, which was omitted from the Code.

#### Amendments

2018—Pub. L. 115–334 substituted "The Secretary may issue" for "The Secretary of Agriculture may issue".

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective Dec. 22, 1981, see section 1801 of Pub. L. 97–98, set out as a note under section 4301 of this title.
#### Bolden *et al. vs.*The State of Georgia.

Where three are indicted for riot in unlawfully assaulting, beating, wounding, and otherwise maltreating another in a violent and tumultuous manner, and the evidence is that two of the three struck and wounded that other by throwing rocks at and hitting him on the head, all acting in a violent and tumultuous manner:

*Held,*that the two were properly convicted of riot under the indictment; and though the testimony as to the persons who began the rocking is conflicting, yet there being enough to uphold the verdict, and the presiding judge approving it, this court will not interfere.

*362Criminal law. Riot. Yerdict. Before Judge Clark. City Court of Atlanta. June Term, 1879.

Reported in the opinion.

Garteell & "Wright, for plaintiffs in error.

Howard Yan Epps, solicitor city court, for the state.

Jackson, Justice.

The defendants were indicted together with one Green Bolden for a riot. All were found guilty, but a new trial was granted Green Bolden, and it being denied the defendants, they excepted. The sole question is, were the two men under the facts guilty of riot ?

The Code declares, “if two or more persons, either with or without a common cause of quarrel, do an unlawful act of violence, or any other act in a violent and tumultuous manner, such persons so'offending shall be guilty of a riot.” The allegation is that in a violent and tumultuous manner the defendants did unlawfully assault, beat; wound and otherwise maltreat Lem Wright. The evidence is that the three assembled at the house of Lem Wright and were violent and tumultuous, and that the two, each of them, threw rocks at Lem, and that he was badly wounded on the head by the rocks thrown by them. The difficulty arose out of the fact that Joe Wright and Green Bolden were fighting about the whipping of some children ; Lem interposed to part them, when the rocks were thrown at him by plaintiffs in error and he was so struck and wounded. The facts make the two guilty of a riot under the law, and the allegation in the indictment was sustained by the state’s testimony.

It was for the jury to decide on the conflict of evidence : but it is unquestionably true that rocks were thrown at Lem Wright by the plaintiffs in error, and that they assem*363bled at his house, and thus the trouble arose. The other defendant got off bj7 the fact that he did not throw *at Lem*Wright, the unlawful act charged in the indictment. The new trial was properly refused as to the plaintiffs in error. 38 *Ga.,*185.

Judgment affirmed.
#### In the Matter of the Microphotography and Destruction of the Orders of the Appellate Division, Fourth Department, from January 1, 1896, through December 31, 1935, pursuant to section 89 of the Judiciary Law.

Order entered.
UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C.  20549



FORM 6-K

REPORT OF FOREIGN PRIVATE ISSUER

PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-16 OR 15d-16

UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934



For the month of March 2007



Commission File Number: 001-31368



SANOFI-AVENTIS

(Translation of registrants name into English)



174, avenue de France, 75013 Paris, FRANCE

(Address of principal executive offices)



Indicate by check mark whether the registrant files or will file annual reports under cover Form 20-F or Form 40-F.


|Form 20-Fx | Form 40-Fo
|---------- | ----------

|Indicate by check mark if the registrant is submitting the Form 6-K in paper as permitted by Regulation S-T Rule 101(b)(1): _____
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|Indicate by check mark if the registrant is submitting the Form 6-K in paper as permitted by Regulation S-T Rule 101(b)(7): _____
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|Indicate by check mark whether the registrant by furnishing the information contained in this Form is also thereby furnishing the information to the Commission pursuant to Rule 12g3-2(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|Yeso | Nox
|---- | ---

|If Yes marked, indicate below the file number assigned to the registrant in connection with Rule 12g3-2(b): 82-________
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------












---



In March 2007, sanofi-aventis issued the press release attached hereto as Exhibit 99.1 which is incorporated herein by reference.



Exhibit List



Exhibit No.
        DescriptionExhibit 99.1
        Press release dated March 28, 2007 Sanofi-aventis and Oxford BioMedicaEnter Global Licensing Agreement to Develop and Commercialise TroVax® For Cancer














2






---



SIGNATURES



Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.



Dated: March 28, 2007
        SANOFI-AVENTISBy:
      /s/ Patricia KodyraName:
      Patricia KodyraTitle:
      Associate Vice President
      Financial and Securities Law




















3






---



Exhibit Index



Exhibit No.
        DescriptionExhibit 99.1
        Press release dated March 28, 2007 Sanofi-aventis and Oxford BioMedicaEnter Global Licensing Agreement to Develop and Commercialise TroVax® For Cancer
























4
### §1347. Repealed. Pub. L. 98–88, §2, Aug. 26, 1983, 97 Stat. 494

Section, acts Feb. 16, 1938, ch. 30, title III, §347, 52 Stat. 59; Aug. 29, 1949, ch. 518, §1, 63 Stat. 675; July 17, 1952, ch. 933, §4, 66 Stat. 759; Aug. 28, 1958, Pub. L. 85–835, title I, § 103(3), 72 Stat. 990; Sept. 21, 1959, Pub. L. 86–341, title II, §203, 73 Stat. 611; June 30, 1960, Pub. L. 86–566, 74 Stat. 295; Aug. 11, 1968, Pub. L. 90–475, §§4, 6, 82 Stat. 701, 702, set out a program for long staple cotton. See section 1444(h) of this title.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Pub. L. 98–88, §2, Aug. 26, 1983, 97 Stat. 494, provided that the repeal of this section is effective beginning with the 1984 crop of extra long staple cotton.
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 30 (Monday, February 14, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 8358]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-3236]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

DOE/NSF High Energy Physics Advisory Panel

AGENCY: Department of Energy, Office of Science.

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the DOE/NSF High Energy 
Physics Advisory Panel (HEPAP). Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 
92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of these meetings be 
announced in the Federal Register.

DATES: Thursday, March 17, 2011, 10 a.m.-6 p.m., and Friday, March 18, 
2011, 8:30 a.m.-2 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Hotel Palomar, 2121 P Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Kogut, Executive Secretary; High 
Energy Physics Advisory Panel; U.S. Department of Energy; SC-25/
Germantown Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 
20585-1290; Telephone: (301) 903-1298 or email: 
John.Kogut@science.doe.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and guidance on a continuing 
basis to the Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation 
on scientific priorities within the field of high energy physics 
research.
    Tentative Agenda: Agenda will include discussions of the following:
     Discussion of Department of Energy High Energy Physics 
Program
     Discussion of National Science Foundation Elementary 
Particle Physics Program
     Reports on and Discussions of Topics of General Interest 
in High Energy Physics
     Public Comment (10-minute rule)
    Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. If you 
would like to file a written statement with the Committee, you may do 
so either before or after the meeting. If you would like to make oral 
statements regarding any of these items on the agenda, you should 
contact John Kogut at (301) 903-1298 or by e-mail at 
John.Kogut@science.doe.gov. You must make your request for an oral 
statement at least 5 business days before the meeting. Reasonable 
provision will be made to include the scheduled oral statements on the 
agenda. The Chairperson of the Panel will conduct the meeting to 
facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Public comment will follow 
the 10-minute rule.
    Minutes: The minutes of the meeting will be available on the U.S. 
Department of Energy's Office of High Energy Physics Web site at http://www.science.doe.gov/hep/panels/hepap.shtml.

LaTanya Butler,
Acting Deputy Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2011-3236 Filed 2-11-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
```
# 2016 Congressional Action
#### KENNEDY v. HAWLEY

No. 20PA98

Case below: 128 N.C.App. 312

Petition by defendant for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 allowed 5 March 1998.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

ELIEZER DIAZ,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D20-331

[April 30, 2020]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Rosemarie Scher, 

Judge; L.T. Case No. 50-2016-CF-003269-AXXX-MB.

Eliezer Diaz, Perry, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GROSS, DAMOORGIAN and CONNER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Curtis Mitchell, Appellant.

[833 NYS2d 488]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward J. McLaughlin, J.), rendered June 9, 2005, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of burglary in the third degree and possession of *358burglar’s tools, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 3 to 6 years and 1 year, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The grand jury indicted defendant for one act of burglary after hearing evidence of two entries into the same premises. Although the People’s bill of particulars, in setting forth the time of the crime, referred only to the first entry, the trial jury, like the grand jury, heard evidence of both entries. The court ultimately instructed the jury, without objection, that it could convict defendant of burglary on the basis of either of the two acts, or both, so long as the verdict was unanimous as to a particular act or acts. On appeal, defendant claims this was error because the jury may have convicted him solely on the basis of the second entry for which, he argues, he was never indicted, given the bill of particulars. This claim is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. The defect, if any, was waivable because it did not affect the court’s competence to convict defendant based on either entry, since they both arose out of the same transaction (see *People v Ford,*62 NY2d 275, 282-283 [1984]; *see also People v Udzinski,*146 AD2d 245, 253-256 [1989], *lv denied*74 NY2d 853 [1989]).

Defendant’s other contention concerning the indictment is without merit.

The court properly denied defendant’s motion to suppress physical evidence. The police lawfully searched defendant’s backpack as incident to his arrest, and we reject his arguments to the contrary (see *People v Smith,*59 NY2d 454 [1983]; *People v Wylie,*244 AD2d 247 [1997], *lv denied*91 NY2d 946 [1998]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Marlow, McGuire and Kavanagh, JJ.
May 14, 1998

MESSAGE TO INTERNET USERS: No. 97-2915 Weiss v. School Board of Hillsborough The above opinion that issued on May 13, 1998 had an Appendix which will not be available on line until a later date.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                              MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         19,207
<SECURITIES>                                        0         
<RECEIVABLES>                                  22,340
<ALLOWANCES>                                      557
<INVENTORY>                                    14,144
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               58,247 
<PP&E>                                         22,976
<DEPRECIATION>                                  9,802
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                106,791
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          34,089
<BONDS>                                        83,359
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          13,454<F2>
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                   (31,779)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  106,791
<SALES>                                        33,892 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               33,892
<CGS>                                          25,246         
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  25,246 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   22
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              2,126
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   331
<INCOME-TAX>                                      116
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               215
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0 
<NET-INCOME>                                      215
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       0<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0<F1>

<FN> 
<F1>  In accordance with SFAS No. 128, earnings per share is not required to be 
      calculated. 

<F2>  Preferred stock-mandatory includes preferred stock units.
</FN> 
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32 (b)

                             CERTIFICATE 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  Annual  Report  of  Enzo  Biochem,   Inc.,  and
Subsidiaries  ("the  Company")  on Form 10-K for the fiscal  year ended July 31,
2006 as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof
(the  "Report"),  I, Barry  Weiner,  Chief  Financial  Officer  of the  Company,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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
Company.



Date:  March 30, 2007                            By: /s/ Barry Weiner
                                                     ----------------
                                                         Barry Weiner
                                                         Chief Financial Officer



     A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906, or
other  document  authenticating,   acknowledging,   or  otherwise  adopting  the
signature  that  appears in typed form  within  the  electronic  version of this
written statement  required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Act
Commission or its staff upon request.
UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549



FORM 6-K



REPORT OF FOREIGN PRIVATE ISSUER

PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-16 OR 15d-16

UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934



Dated July 6, 2006



Commission File Number: 001-14666



MITTAL STEEL COMPANY N.V.

(Translation of registrants name into English)



15th Floor, Hofplein 20

3032 AC Rotterdam

The Netherlands

(Address of principal executive offices)



Indicate by check mark whether the registrant files or will file annual reports under cover Form 20-F or Form 40-F.



Form 20-FxForm 40-Fo



Indicate by check mark if the registrant is submitting the Form 6-K in paper as permitted by Regulation S-T Rule 101(b)(1): _____



Indicate by check mark if the registrant is submitting the Form 6-K in paper as permitted by Regulation S-T Rule 101(b)(7): _____



Indicate by check mark whether the registrant by furnishing the information contained in this Form is also thereby furnishing the information to the Commission pursuant to Rule 12g3-2(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.



YesoNox



If Yes marked, indicate below the file number assigned to the registrant in connection with Rule 12g3-2(b): 82-________



















---







On July 5, 2006, Mittal Steel Company N.V. issuedthe press release attached hereto as Exhibit 99.1.



Exhibit List



|Exhibit No.  | Description                                                                                                                                                                                  | 
|------------ | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|Exhibit 99.1 | Press release dated July 5, 2006, providing additional information regarding the revised offer for Arcelor and its consequences for the shareholders of Arcelor Brasil S.A. and Acesita S.A.















| |  | 
| |  | 





---







SIGNATURES



Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.



Date: July 6, 2006



| | By: | /s/ Henk Scheffer
| | --- | -----------------
| |     | Name:            
| |     | Title:           



























| |  | 
| |  | 





---







Exhibit Index



|Exhibit No.  | Description                                                                                                                                                                                  | 
|------------ | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|Exhibit 99.1 | Press release dated July 5, 2006, providing additional information regarding the revised offer for Arcelor and its consequences for the shareholders of Arcelor Brasil S.A. and Acesita S.A.

















| |  | 
| |  |