alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
John E. Skvarla, III Secretary Pat McCrory

Governor 

# AVA NCDENR North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Division of Air Quality

Sheila C. Holman Director

May 1,2013
Gwendolyn Keyes Fleming Regional Administrator USEPA, Region 4 SamNunn Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, SW Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960 Subject: State Implementation Plan (SIP) Approval Request for Amendments to Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) Rules
DearMs. Fleming: In their review ofNorth Carolina's Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill area redesignation request and maintenance plan for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, your staffidentified the need for an adjustment ofapplicability ofNorth Carolina's Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) rules for all sources addressed by Control Technology Guidelines (CTGs) in areas classified as moderate and above for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS to meet the requirements ofSection 182(b)(2) ofthe Clean Air Act. Specifically, the EPA identifiedthe need for North Carolinato address RACT applicability for sources in CTG. categories with VOC emissions less than 100 tons per year. Based on monitoring data, North Carolina is attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) and received a clean data determination for the Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill area on November 15, 2011. North Carolina has completed the process ofrevising its state rules to address the requirements ofSection 182(b)(2). On March 14,2013 the Environmental Management Commission (EMC) amended 15ANCAC 02D .0902, .0903, .0909, .0951, .0961, and .0962 which were the subject ofapublic hearing held January 15,2013. The rules were approved by the State Rules Review Commission (RRC) on April 18,2013 and are effective May 1,2013. Enclosed in the transmittal ofthis package to your staffnoted below are a single hard copy and an identical electronic copy on CD ofthe final rules and associated hearing record. Please proceed to approve the aforementioned rules as part ofthe federally-approved State Implementation Plan.

1641 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699·1641 217 West Jones Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 Phone: 919·707·8401/ Fax: 919·715·0718 Internet: www.ncair.org
An Equal Opportunity\Affirmative Action Employer

- Made in part by Recycled PaperMs. Fleming May 1,2013 Page 2 of2

We lookforward to yourreview and approval ofthese amendments. Please feel free to contact me orJoelle Burleson ofmy staffat (919) 707-8720 ifyou have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely,

Sheila C. Holman Enclosures SCH/jbb

c: Beverly Banister ScottDavis Lynorae Benjamin NacostaWard (hardcopy and CD) Jane Spann Michael Abraczinskas SushmaMasemore
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
 
      a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls
and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by
others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;b)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal
control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation
of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles;c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; andd)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control
over financial reporting; and
  a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect
the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;
andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
 December 6, 2006
    
    /s/ Marla L. SchaeferMarla L. Schaefer
Co-Chief Executive Officer
 28
1235.070 Research misconduct. ( a ) *Applicability.* DOT policy on scientific integrity is implemented in the Deputy Secretary's memorandum dated April 10, 2012, Implementation of Departmental Scientific Integrity Policy at *https://www.transportation.gov/administrations/assistant-secretary-research-and-technology/memorandum-implementation-departmental .* The Department is dedicated to preserving the integrity of the research it conducts and funds and will not tolerate misconduct in the performance of these activities. This policy applies to all DOT-funded or DOT-conducted research, including intramural research, research conducted by contractors, and research performed at research institutions, including universities and industry.
( b ) *Definition. Research misconduct* means fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results. Research misconduct does not include honest error or differences of opinion. A finding of research misconduct means a determination based on a preponderance of the evidence that research misconduct has occurred, including a conclusion that there has been a significant departure from accepted practices of the relevant research community and that it was knowingly, intentionally, or recklessly committed.
#### Joseph Guadagna et al., Doing Business as Joe’s Trucking, Respondents, v. Employers’ Liability Assurance Corporation, Ltd., Appellant.

Order unanimously affirmed, with $25 costs and disbursements. (Appeal from order of Onondaga Special Term granting plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and denying defendant’s motion for summary judgment.) Present — Bastow, J. P., Goldman, Halpern, McClosky and Henry, JJ.
**Exhibit 32**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

This certification set forth below is hereby made solely for thepurposes of satisfying the requirements of Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and may not be relied upon or used for any otherpurposes.

 

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to Access Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and will be retained by AccessPharmaceuticals, Inc. and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon its request.

 

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Public Company Accounting Reform andInvestor Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted, the “Sarbanes-Oxley Act”),Rosemary Mazanet, Acting Chief Executive Officer of Access Pharmaceuticals,Inc. (the “Company”), and Stephen B. Thompson, Vice President and ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies that to his knowledgethe Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2005 of theCompany filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company for the period specified.

 

Signed at the City of  Dallas, inthe State of Texas, this 25th day of April, 2006.

 

 
| /s/ Rosemary Mazanet            |   |                     | /s/ Stephen B. Thompson |   |
|---------------------------------|--------|--------------------------|-------------------------|--------|
| Rosemary Mazanet                |   | Stephen B. Thompson      |
| Acting Chief Executive  Officer |   | Chief Financial  Officer |

 

----
1830.7001-4 Postaward FCCOM applications. ( a ) *Interim billings based on costs incurred.* ( 1 ) The contractor may include FCCOM in cost reimbursement and progress payment invoices. To determine the amount that qualifies as cost incurred, multiply the incurred portions of the overhead pool allocation bases by the latest available cost of money factors. These FCCOM calculations are interim estimates subject to adjustment.
( 2 ) As actual cost of money factors are finalized, use the new factors to calculate FCCOM for the next accounting period.
( b ) *Final settlements.* ( 1 ) Contract FCCOM for final cost determination or repricing is based on each year's final cost of money factors determined under CAS 414 and supported by separate Forms CASB-CMF.
( 2 ) Separately compute contract FCCOM in a manner similar to yearly final overhead rates. As in overhead rates, include in the final settlement an adjustment from interim to final contract FCCOM. Do not adjust the contract estimated or target cost.
<TABLE> <S> <C>
                               
<ARTICLE>                                   5
<LEGEND>                         
     This schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted from the
Partnership's  unaudited  financial  statements for the year ended September 30,
1998 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>                        
<MULTIPLIER>                            1,000
                                     
<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                          12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                 Sep-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                      Sep-30-1998
<CASH>                                    911
<SECURITIES>                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                               0
<ALLOWANCES>                                0
<INVENTORY>                                 0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                          973
<PP&E>                                  5,038
<DEPRECIATION>                          1,593
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          4,367
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                     172
<BONDS>                                 1,124
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0
<PREFERRED>                                 0
<COMMON>                                    0
<OTHER-SE>                              3,071
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            4,367
<SALES>                                     0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        2,950
<CGS>                                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                             700
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        130
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         2,120
<INCOME-TAX>                                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                     2,120
<DISCONTINUED>                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0
<CHANGES>                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                            2,120
<EPS-PRIMARY>                           97.41
<EPS-DILUTED>                           97.41
        

</TABLE>
### §4814. Petition and review

(a)(1) A person subject to an order may file with the Secretary a petition—

(A) stating that such order, a provision of such order, or an obligation imposed in connection with such order is not in accordance with law; and

(B) requesting a modification of such order or an exemption from such order.

(2) Such person shall be given an opportunity for a hearing on the petition, in accordance with regulations issued by the Secretary.

(3) After such hearing, the Secretary shall make a determination granting or denying such petition.

(b)(1) A district court of the United States in the district in which such person resides or does business shall have jurisdiction to review such determination if a complaint for such purpose is filed not later than 20 days after the date such person receives notice of such determination.

(2) Service of process in such proceeding may be made on the Secretary by delivering a copy of the complaint to the Secretary.

(3) If a court determines that such determination is not in accordance with law, the court shall remand such proceedings to the Secretary with directions to—

(A) make such ruling as the court shall determine to be in accordance with law; or

(B) take such further proceedings as, in the opinion of the court, the law requires.

(Pub. L. 99–198, title XVI, §1625, Dec. 23, 1985, 99 Stat. 1619.)

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective Jan. 1, 1986, see section 1631 of Pub. L. 99–198, set out as a note under section 4801 of this title.
Appeal No. 74-143.

#### Chester W. Greenhalgh *v.*Edward Moretti *et al.*

*Howard I. Lipsey,*for appellee. *John H. McHugh,*for appellants.

Motion of appellee, Chester W. Greenhalgh, to dismiss the appeal for failure of the defendant-appellant to file his brief is granted.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

LOCAL 705 INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD

OF TEAMSTERS HEALTH AND WELFARE

FUND, et al.,

Plaintiffs, 

v.

MARIO A. FIORENZO, JR.,

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CIVIL ACTION

NO. 11 C 7967

JUDGE GARY FEINERMAN

MOTION FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT AND JUDGMENT

NOW COME Plaintiffs, LOCAL 705 INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF

TEAMSTERS HEALTH AND WELFARE FUND, et al., by their attorneys, and move for entry of

judgment by default against Defendant, MARIO A. FIORENZO, JR. in the total amount of

$8,475.82, plus Plaintiffs' costs of action. 

On November 21, 2011, the Summons and Complaint was served on the Defendant by

tendering a copy of said documents to him personally, at his residence (a copy of the Summons and

Affidavit of Service is attached hereto). Therefore, Defendant’s answer was due on December 12,

2011. As Defendant has failed to timely answer the Complaint, Plaintiffs respectfully request entry

of default and judgment.

/s/ Catherine M. Chapman 

Case: 1:11-cv-07967 Document #: 5 Filed: 12/28/11 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:23
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned, an attorney of record, hereby certifies that she electronically filed the

foregoing document (Motion) with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, and further

certifies that I have mailed the above-referenced document by United States Mail to the following

non-CM/ECF participant on or before the hour of 5:00 p.m. this 28th day of December 2011:

Mr. Mario A. Fiorenzo, Jr.

149 Westwood Drive

Park Forest, IL 60466

/s/ Catherine M. Chapman 

Catherine M. Chapman

Attorney for Plaintiffs

BAUM SIGMAN AUERBACH & NEUMAN, LTD.

200 West Adams Street, Suite 2200

Chicago, IL 60606-5231

Bar No.: 6204026

Telephone: (312) 236-4316

Facsimile: (312) 236-0241

E-Mail: cchapman@baumsigman.com

I:\705w\Subro\Fiorenzo\03-14-03\motion.cmc.df.wpd

Case: 1:11-cv-07967 Document #: 5 Filed: 12/28/11 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:24
Exhibit 23.1




                             Consent of Independent Auditors





<PAGE>





  The Board of Directors
  Unique Mobility, Inc.:


  We consent to the  incorporation by reference in the  registration  statements
  (Nos.  33-61166,  33-63399,  333-01919  and  333-13883) on Form S-3 and in the
  registration  statements  (Nos.  33-23113,   33-24071,   33-34612,   33-35055,
  33-34613, 33-41325, 33-64852, 34-47454, 33-81430, and 33-92288) on Form S-8 of
  Unique  Mobility,  Inc.  of our report  dated June 26,  1997  relating  to the
  consolidated  balance sheets of Unique  Mobility,  Inc. and subsidiaries as of
  March 31, 1997 and October 31, 1996, and the related  consolidated  statements
  of operations,  stockholders' equity, and cash flows for the five months ended
  March 31, 1997 and each of the years in the  three-year  period ended  October
  31, 1996, which report appears in the March 31, 1997 Transition Report on Form
  10-KT/A of Unique Mobility, Inc.



                                 KPMG Peat Marwick LLP
   
  Denver, Colorado
  October 6, 1997
#### In the Matter of Monda Roberts et al., Respondents, v. James E. Allen, Jr., as Commissioner of Education of the State of New York, Appellant, and A. Richard O’Connor et al., Respondents.

Appeal dismissed as moot, without costs, it appearing upon the argument that the office in dispute was filled at a regular election held subsequent to the taking of the appeal. Bergan, P. J., Coon, Gibson, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ., concur.
#### 1480.101 Scope of part.

This part implements policies and procedures for the procurement of supplies, general services, architect and engineering (A&E) services, or construction while giving preference to Indian Economic Enterprises under authority of the Buy Indian Act (25 U.S.C. 47).
<PAGE>

                                  Exhibit 99.01

       CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND TREASURER PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on From 10-Q of Chase General
Corporation (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), Barry M. Yantis, as Chief Executive Officer and Treasurer of the
Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of
his knowledge:

     (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 Corporation.


/s/ Barry M. Yantis
-------------------------------------------------------
Name: Barry M. Yantis
Title: President, Chief Executive Officer and Treasurer
Date: 2-10-03

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of 18 of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

                                       17
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 83 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 83

To authorize the National Science Foundation to support entrepreneurial 
                          programs for women.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 10, 2017

  Ms. Klobuchar (for herself and Mr. Heller) introduced the following 
 bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, 
                      Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To authorize the National Science Foundation to support entrepreneurial 
                          programs for women.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Promoting Women in Entrepreneurship 
Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    The Congress finds that--
            (1) women make up almost 50 percent of the workforce, but 
        less than 25 percent of the workforce in science, technology, 
        engineering, and mathematics (STEM) professions;
            (2) women are less likely to focus on the STEM disciplines 
        in undergraduate and graduate study;
            (3) only 26 percent of women who do attain degrees in STEM 
        fields work in STEM jobs;
            (4) there is an increasing demand for individuals with STEM 
        degrees to extend their focus beyond the laboratory so they can 
        be leaders in discovery commercialization;
            (5) studies have shown that technology and 
        commercialization ventures are successful when women are in top 
        management positions; and
            (6) the National Science Foundation's mission includes 
        supporting women in STEM disciplines.

SEC. 3. SUPPORTING WOMEN'S ENTREPRENEURIAL PROGRAMS.

    Section 33 of the Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act 
(42 U.S.C. 1885a) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (10);
            (2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (11) and 
        inserting ``; and''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
            ``(12) encourage its entrepreneurial programs to recruit 
        and support women to extend their focus beyond the laboratory 
        and into the commercial world.''.
                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-6870

ANTHONY SHANE MARTIN,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

ERIN GAFFNEY; LISA YOUNG; RAY WALKER; LENOKA GAVIN; 

HODIYAH LEWIS; JILL CARDARON,

 Defendants - Appellees,

and

WELLPATH/CORRECT CARE,

 Defendant.

No. 23-6875

ANTHONY SHANE MARTIN,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

CORRECT CARE RECOVERY SOLUTIONS; ERIN GAFFNEY, Facility 

Administrator; BRIAN DAVIS, Security Administrator; JARED ANDERSON, 

Administrator; DOCTOR DUBIE, Facility Psychologist; GINA BRISSON, Vice 

President,

 Defendants - Appellees.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6875 Doc: 29 Filed: 06/27/2024 Pg: 1 of 3
2

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at 

Florence. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. (4:22-cv-02042-HMH; 4:22-cv02043-HMH)

Submitted: June 25, 2024 Decided: June 27, 2024

Before RICHARDSON and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Anthony Shane Martin, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel Quintin Atkinson, Mark Victor Gende, 

SWEENY, WINGATE & BARROW, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6875 Doc: 29 Filed: 06/27/2024 Pg: 2 of 3
3

PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated appeals, Anthony Martin appeals the district court’s order 

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Martin’s 42 

U.S.C. § 1983 complaints. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Martin v. Gaffney, No. 4:22-cv-02042-

HMH (D.S.C. Aug. 14, 2023); Martin v. Correct Care Recovery Solutions, No. 

4:22-cv-02024-HMH (D.S.C. Aug. 14, 2023). We dispense with oral argument because 

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court 

and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6875 Doc: 29 Filed: 06/27/2024 Pg: 3 of 3