alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 6,1

Eastern Division

Shoshana Cooper, et al.

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:12−cv−05104

Honorable Ronald A. Guzman

Monty G. Cassidy, et al.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Tuesday, August 11, 2015:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: Jury trial held on

8/11/2015 and adjourned to 8/12/2015 at 09:30 AM. Mailed notice (cjg, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:12-cv-05104 Document #: 113 Filed: 08/11/15 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:1867
Questions for Consideration and Discussion

Exceptional Events Listening Session in Advance of Anticipated Rule Revisions 

1. Should we maintain the position presented in the interim guidance that the historical 

fluctuations criterion is not a “test” but a weight-of-evidence analysis that informs “clear 

causal” and “but for”?

2. Do the following High Wind elements provide streamlining and flexibility? 

a. Wind speed threshold

b. Prospective controls analysis

c. High Wind Action Plan

3. Would it be helpful to incorporate the following “not reasonably controllable or 

preventable” elements in rule language?

a. Recently approved SIP measures meet “not reasonably controllable or preventable” 

requirements

b. For natural sources and interstate/international transport no control = reasonable 

control

4. How should we address the “but for” criterion? Examples might include the following:

a. Address adjustment of design values and daily values for events that are not 

“exceptional” by definition

b. Revise definition away from “absolute” to more “weight of evidence”

c. Other suggestions?

5. Do we need to provide definitions for the following terms?

a. Event/natural event

b. Recurrence of natural events

c. Reasonable

d. Other terms? 

6. Should we address mitigation elements, including the relationship between Subpart H 

emergency episodes / contingency planning and exceptional events?

7. Would it be helpful to clarify those activities that constitute an EPA final agency action?
Questions for Consideration and Discussion

Exceptional Events Listening Session in Advance of Anticipated Rule Revisions

Page 2 of 2

8. Do we need to clarify that concurrences are NAAQS-specific, not pollutant specific?

9. Should we address whether EPA can consider a request for exclusion even if the air agency 

makes the request after the deadline?

10. Have air agencies experienced difficulty when flagging concurrences of PM2.5 and PM10 filter 

based (single 24-hour value) versus continuous (24 1-hour values)? Has this created a 

difference in design values?

11. Would it be helpful to “clean-up” the EER to address the following?

a. Scheduling provisions included in reg text that have been made irrelevant by the 

passage of time (e.g., 50.14(c)(2)(iv) For PM2.5 data collected during calendar years 

2004-2006....)

b. Scheduling deadlines following promulgation of new NAAQS to avoid case-by-case 

revisions

12. Do we need to address fire-related components? If so, how?
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-30814

Summary Calendar

 

HERMAN JOHNSON, JR.,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

JOHN P. WHITLEY, Warden,

Louisiana State Penitentiary;

RICHARD P. IEYOUB, Attorney General,

State of Louisiana,

Respondents-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 94-CV-3980-E

- - - - - - - - - -

December 19, 1996

Before GARWOOD, JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Herman Johnson, Jr., Louisiana state prisoner #121967,

appeals from the district court’s dismissal of his petition for

writ of habeas corpus. He has filed a motion with this court to

proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal. This court must examine the

basis of its jurisdiction on its own motion if necessary. Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th
No. 96-30814

- 2 -

Cir. 1987). Johnson did not file a notice of appeal from the district court’s denial of his habeas

petition. Although he refiled his original § 2254 petition one year after the court’s judgment, his

habeas petition is ineffective to serve as a notice of appeal

because it did not “clearly evince an intent to appeal.” See id.

 To the extent that any documents subsequently filed by Johnson evince an intent to appeal, they

are untimely as they were filed more than thirty days after the district court’s entry of final

judgment. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1). A timely notice of appeal is a prerequisite for the

exercise of jurisdiction by this court. United States v. Carr, 979 F.2d 51, 55 (5th Cir. 1992). 

Because Johnson did not file a timely notice of appeal, this court lacks appellate jurisdiction. 

Johnson’s motion for IFP is therefore DENIED as unnecessary and his appeal is DISMISSED.
235.016 Broad agency announcement. ( a ) *General.* A broad agency announcement with peer or scientific review may be used for the award of science and technology proposals. Science and technology proposals include proposals for the following: ( i ) Basic research (budget activity 6.1).
( ii ) Applied research (budget activity 6.2).
( iii ) Advanced technology development (budget activity 6.3).
( iv ) Advanced component development and prototypes (budget activity 6.4).
[84 FR 4366, Feb. 15, 2019]
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 19 (Monday, February 1, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7715-7716]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-01991]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Air Force


Record of Decision for the Environmental Impact Statement United 
States Air Force F-35A Operational Beddown Air Force Reserve Command

AGENCY: Department of the Air Force, Department of the Navy, Department 
of Defense.

ACTION: Notice of availability of record of decision.

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

SUMMARY: On December 22, 2020, the United States Air Force (USAF) 
signed the Record of Decision (ROD) for the Environmental Impact 
Statement: United States Air Force F-35A Operational Beddown Air Force 
Reserve Command. The Department of the Navy (Navy) previously signed 
the same ROD on October 29, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Mr. Hamid Kamalpour, AFCEC/CZN, 2261 Hughes Avenue, Suite 
155, JBSA-Lackland Air Force Base, Texas 78236-9853, (210) 925-2738; 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#155d44545347563b533826203b505c465560663b74733b787c79"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="074f564641554429412a343229424e54477274296661296a6e6b">[email protected]</span></a>. The complete text of the ROD is available on 
the project website at https://www.afrc-f35a-beddown.com/, along with 
the Final EIS and supporting documents.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The USAF has decided to beddown its 7th 
Operational squadron (Ops 7) of up to 24 F-35A Primary Aerospace 
Vehicles Authorized (PAA) with 2 Backup Aircraft Inventory (BAI) in one 
squadron under the Air Force Reserve Command at Naval Air Station Joint 
Reserve Base Fort Worth, Texas. The Navy concurs in the Air Force's 
decision.
    The USAF and Navy decision documented in the ROD was based on

[[Page 7716]]

matters discussed in the Final Environmental Impact Statement, inputs 
from the public and regulatory agencies, and other relevant factors. 
The USAF is the lead agency with the Navy as a cooperating agency. The 
Final Environmental Impact Statement was made available to the public 
on August 21, 2020 through a Notice of Availability in the Federal 
Register (Volume 85, Number 163, Page 51693) with a waiting period that 
ended on September 21, 2020.

    Authority: This Notice of Availability is published pursuant to 
the regulations (40 CFR part 1506.6) implementing the provisions of 
the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq.) and 
the Air Force's Environmental Impact Analysis Process (32 CFR parts 
989.21(b) and 989.24(b)(7)).

Adriane S. Paris,
Acting Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2021-01991 Filed 1-29-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-10-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
**Exhibit 32**

 

**Certification of Chief Executive Officerand Chief Financial Officerpursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350**

 

In connection with the quarterly report of Cascade Corporation (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the period ended April 30, 2008 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), theundersigned certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(i)            The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities and Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(ii)           The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/  ROBERT C. WARREN, JR. |   |
|----------------------------|--------|
| Robert C. Warren, Jr. |
| *Chief Executive Officer*  |
| June 6, 2008          |
|                       |
| /s/ JOSEPH G. POINTER      |   |
| Joseph G. Pointer          |
| *Chief Financial Officer*  |
| June 6, 2008          |

 

----
23.303 Notice of radioactive materials. ( a ) The clause at 52.223-7, Notice of Radioactive Materials, requires the contractor to notify the contracting officer prior to delivery of radioactive material.
( b ) Upon receipt of the notice, the contracting officer shall notify receiving activities so that appropriate safeguards can be taken.
( c ) The clause permits the contracting officer to waive the notification if the contractor states that the notification on prior deliveries is still current. The contracting officer may waive the notice only after consultation with cognizant technical representatives.
( d ) The contracting officer is required to specify in the clause at 52.223-7, the number of days in advance of delivery that the contractor will provide notification. The determination of the number of days should be done in coordination with the installation/facility radiation protection officer (RPO). The RPO is responsible for ensuring the proper license, authorization, or permit is obtained prior to receipt of the radioactive material.
[89 FR 30243, Apr. 22, 2024]
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Joseph Anthony Vidal, Appellant.

— Appeal by defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the County Court, Suffolk County, imposed November 4, 1976, upon his conviction of manslaughter in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, the sentence being a term of imprisonment of 814 years to 25 years to be served consecutive to a previously imposed Federal sentence. Sentence modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by changing to concurrent the provision that it be served consecutive to the previously imposed Federal sentence. As so modified, sentence affirmed. The sentence was excessive to the extent indicated herein. Suozzi, J. P., Rabin, Gulotta and Shapiro, JJ., concur.
## Key Staff

**Division Director:**James Laws, (202) 453-7348

**Program Officers:**

Lead Program Officer: Nalini Lamba-Nieves, (202) 453-7953Yolande Badarou, (202) 453-7632Don Crews, (202) 453-7920 Pearson Owens, (202) 987-1866Christopher Smith, (202) 453-7946Tonia Vaughn, (202) 453-7911Robyn Wood, (202) 453-7744

**Mailing Address:**

U.S. Department of Education, OPEHigher Education ProgramsTitle III Part A Programs, Strengthening Institutions400 Maryland Avenue, S.W.LBJ 5th FloorWashington, DC  20202

Institutional Service Home
# C_2018084EN.01000401.xml

| 6.3.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 84/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.3.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84/4

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

5 March 2018

(2018/C 84/04)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2307 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 130,02 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4468 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,89070 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,1683 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,1549 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 123,70 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,6335 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,404 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 313,76 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,1909 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,6618 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 4,6939 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5887 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5914 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,6398 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7026 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,6238 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 328,69 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 14,6176 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,8030 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4303 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 16 937,51 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,8059 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 63,953 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 70,2980 |
| THB | Thai baht | 38,669 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,0096 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 23,2587 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 80,1275 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2307

JPY

Japanese yen

130,02

DKK

Danish krone

7,4468

GBP

Pound sterling

0,89070

SEK

Swedish krona

10,1683

CHF

Swiss franc

1,1549

ISK

Iceland króna

123,70

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,6335

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,404

HUF

Hungarian forint

313,76

PLN

Polish zloty

4,1909

RON

Romanian leu

4,6618

TRY

Turkish lira

4,6939

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5887

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5914

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,6398

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7026

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,6238

KRW

South Korean won

1 328,69

ZAR

South African rand

14,6176

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,8030

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4303

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

16 937,51

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,8059

PHP

Philippine peso

63,953

RUB

Russian rouble

70,2980

THB

Thai baht

38,669

BRL

Brazilian real

4,0096

MXN

Mexican peso

23,2587

INR

Indian rupee

80,1275

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
400 Maryland Avenue, S.W., Washington, DC 20202

www.ed.gov

The Department of Education’s mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global Competitiveness 

by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

OFFICE OF POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION

2021 Negotiated Rulemaking

Prison Education Programs Subcommittee (non-voting)

U. S. Department of Education

Aaron Washington, Office of Postsecondary Education (Subcommittee leader)

Ronald Sann, Office of General Counsel

Consumer Advocacy Organizations

Belinda Wheeler, Vera Institute of Justice

Financial Aid Administrators

Kim Cary, Ozarks Technical Community College

Formerly Incarcerated Students

Stanley Andrisse, Howard University College of Medicine

Groups that Represent Incarcerated Students

Terrell Blount, Formerly Incarcerated College Graduates Network

Postsecondary Institutions that are Prison Education Program Providers

Terrence S. McTier, Jr., Washington University

State Correctional Education Directors

Marisa Britton-Bostwick, Montana Correctional Enterprises

State Higher Education Executive Officers

Angie Paccione, Colorado Department of Higher Education

Last updated 10/7/2021
EXHIBIT
32











Certification


Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


(Subsections
(a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States
Code)





Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63
of Title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of Chattem,
Inc., a Tennessee corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such
officer’s knowledge, that:





The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for
the quarter ended February 28, 2009 (the “Form 10-Q”) of the Company fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company.


Date: April 9, 2009
              /s/ Zan Guerry
                Zan
      Guerry, Chairman and
                Chief
      Executive Officer
   Date: April 9, 2009
              /s/ Robert B. Long
                Robert
      B. Long
                Vice
      President and Chief Financial
Officer





The foregoing certification is being
furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States
Code) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-Q, or as a separate
disclosure
document.





A SIGNED ORIGINAL OF THIS WRITTEN
STATEMENT REQUIRED BY SECTION 906 HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO CHATTEM, INC. AND WILL BE
RETAINED BY CHATTEM, INC. AND FURNISHED TO THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION OR ITS STAFF UPON REQUEST.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 425 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 425

   Supporting the designation of March 2018 as ``National Colorectal 
                       Cancer Awareness Month''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 7, 2018

    Mr. Enzi (for himself and Mr. Menendez) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   Supporting the designation of March 2018 as ``National Colorectal 
                       Cancer Awareness Month''.

Whereas colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death among men 
        and women combined in the United States;
Whereas, in 2018, it is estimated that more than 140,250 individuals in the 
        United States will be diagnosed with colorectal cancer and approximately 
        50,630 more will die from it;
Whereas colorectal cancer is one of the most preventable forms of cancer because 
        screening tests can find polyps that can be removed before becoming 
        cancerous;
Whereas screening tests can detect colorectal cancer early, which is when the 
        disease is most treatable;
Whereas the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that if every 
        individual who is 50 years of age or older had regular screening tests, 
        as many as 60 percent of deaths from colorectal cancer could be 
        prevented;
Whereas the 5-year survival rate for patients with localized colorectal cancer 
        is 90 percent, but only 39 percent of all diagnoses occur at that stage;
Whereas colorectal cancer screenings can effectively reduce the incidence of 
        colorectal cancer and mortality, but 1 in 3 adults between 50 and 75 
        years of age are not up to date with recommended colorectal cancer 
        screening;
Whereas public awareness and education campaigns on colorectal cancer 
        prevention, screening, and symptoms are held during the month of March 
        each year; and
Whereas educational efforts can help provide to the public information on 
        methods of prevention and screening as well as symptoms for early 
        detection: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) supports--
                    (A) the designation of March 2018 as ``National 
                Colorectal Cancer Awareness Month''; and
                    (B) the goals and ideals of National Colorectal 
                Cancer Awareness Month; and
            (2) encourages the people of the United States to observe 
        National Colorectal Cancer Awareness Month with appropriate 
        awareness and educational activities.
                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 5.0.3

Eastern Division

Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:12−cv−05252

Honorable Marvin E. Aspen

Jay Marshall Strabala

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Thursday, August 9, 2012:

 MINUTE entry before Honorable Marvin E. Aspen:Status hearing held on

8/9/2012, and continued to 10/4/2012 at 10:30 AM. The parties are referred to Magistrate

Judge Brown for a settlement conference. If the case does not settle, a supplemental

motion to dismiss is to be filed and the court will set a briefing schedule.Judicial staff

mailed notice(gl, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:12-cv-05252 Document #: 56 Filed: 08/09/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:858
#### 2801.304 Agency control and compliance procedures.

Pursuant to FAR 1.304, the Senior Procurement Executive (SPE) is responsible for ensuring that bureau acquisition guidance and directives do not restrain the flexibilities found in the FAR. For this reason, bureaus shall forward any bureau acquisition guidance to the SPE upon issuance. The SPE has the authority to revoke any guidance or directive considered restrictive of the regulations found in the FAR.
June 27, 2011 Dear Sir or Madam: Horizon Air Industries, Inc. petitions the FAA for an exemption to 14 CFR 121.434(c)(1)(ii) to substitute a qualified and authorized check airman for an FAA inspector to observe a qualifying pilot in command (PIC) who is completing initial or upgrade training specified in § 121.424 during at least one flight leg that includes a takeoff and a landing. Horizon Air requests this relief due to a shortage of local FAA inspectors available to conduct the required observations. Horizon Air believes that granting relief is in the public’s best interest by preventing schedule disruptions that may result from a shortage of qualified flight crewmembers and avoiding public expenses associated with bringing in FAA Inspectors from outside the region to conduct the observations. Horizon Air maintains a staff of experienced and qualified check airman dedicated to ensuring safety, standardization, and professionalism within the pilo t ranks. Horizon Air Check Airmen are experienced observers and will ensure a level of safety that me ets or exceeds th e requirements of 14 CFR 121.434.

Sincerely,

Kenith Heninger Director of Operations 

# Horizon Air 8070 NE Airtrans Way Portland, OR 97218