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

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1900 

To provide for the timely consideration of all licenses, permits, and approvals 

required under Federal law with respect to the siting, construction, 

expansion, or operation of any natural gas pipeline projects. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 9, 2013 

Mr. POMPEO (for himself, Mr. MATHESON, Mr. OLSON, Mr. GARDNER, and 

Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio) introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To provide for the timely consideration of all licenses, permits, and approvals required under Federal law with 

respect to the siting, construction, expansion, or operation of any natural gas pipeline projects. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Natural Gas Pipeline 

5 Permitting Reform Act’’. 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1900 IH

1 SEC. 2. REGULATORY APPROVAL OF NATURAL GAS PIPE2 LINE PROJECTS. 

3 Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717f) 

4 is amended by adding at the end the following new sub5 sections: 

6 ‘‘(i) The Commission shall approve or deny a certifi7 cate of public convenience and necessity that is sought 

8 under this Act not later than 12 months after providing 

9 public notice of the application. 

10 ‘‘(j)(1) The agency responsible for issuing any li11 cense, permit, or approval required under Federal law in 

12 connection with the siting, construction, expansion, or op13 eration of any natural gas pipeline project for which a cer14 tificate of public convenience and necessity is sought under 

15 this Act shall approve or deny the issuance of the license, 

16 permit, or approval not later than 90 days after the Com17 mission issues its final environmental document relating 

18 to the project. 

19 ‘‘(2) An agency may request that the Commission ex20 tend the time period under paragraph (1) by 30 days. The 

21 Commission shall grant such extension if the agency dem22 onstrates that the extension is necessary because of un23 foreseen circumstances beyond the control of the agency. 

24 ‘‘(3) If an agency described in paragraph (1) does 

25 not approve or deny the issuance of the license, permit, 

26 or approval within the time period specified under paraVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:48 May 11, 2013 Jkt 029200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1900.IH H1900

smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1900 IH

1 graph (1) or (2), as applicable, such license, permit, or 

2 approval shall go into effect.’’. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### In the Matter of Richard G. Wall, an Attorney, Respondent. Departmental Disciplinary Committee for the First Judicial Department, Petitioner.

First Department,

June 24, 1980

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Nicholas C. Cooper*for petitioner.

No appearance by respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

*Per Curiam.*

Respondent was admitted to practice at a term of the Appellate Division, First Department, on February 25, 1974.

On December 4, 1979, a judgment of conviction was ren*197dered against respondent in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, following a jury verdict finding him guilty of unlawfully, intentionally and knowingly combining, confederating and agreeing with another to violate sections 812, 841 (subd [a], par [1]), 841 (subd [b], par [1], cl [A]), 841 (subd [b], par [1], cl [B]), 951, 952 and 960 of title 21 of the United States Code, i.e., conspiring to import and distribute cocaine. (US Code, tit 21, § 846.)

The crime of which respondent has been convicted is a felony under Federal law and is a criminal offense which, if committed within this State, would constitute a felony (Penal Law, § 105.10, conspiracy in the fourth degree, a class E felony). The crime which respondent conspired to commit would, under New York law, constitute criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, a class B felony (Penal Law, § 220.16.)

By virtue of subdivision 4 of section 90 of the Judiciary Law, respondent ceased to be an attorney and counselor at law of the State of New York at the moment of said conviction. *(Matter of Mitchell,*40 NY2d 153; *Matter of Ginsberg,*1 NY2d 144.)

The petition to strike respondent’s name from the roll of attorneys should be granted.

Murphy, P. J., Fein, Sandler and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

Respondent’s name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors at law in the State of New York.
Editorial Note on Subchapter B of Chapter XIV
Editorial Note: For Federal Register citations to regulations affecting previous program years not included in this volume, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at *www.govinfo.gov .*

§ 1413.112 Appeals. ( a ) *Appeals.* Appeal regulations set forth at parts 11 and 780 of this title apply to determinations made under this subpart.
( b ) *Determinations not eligible for administrative review or appeal.* CCC determinations and policies that are not limited to a specific individual producer's application are not to be construed to be individual program eligibility determinations or adverse decisions and are, therefore, not subject to administrative review or appeal under 7 CFR part 11 or part 780 of this title (but nothing in the regulations for this program will limit the ability of the National Appeals Division to decide its own jurisdiction under part 11). Such determinations include, but are not limited to, application periods, deadlines, crop years, prices, general statutory or regulatory provisions that apply to similarly situated producers, national average payment prices, and payment factors established by CCC for DWQP for which this subpart applies or similar matters requiring CCC determinations.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jacob Jones, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County, rendered on June 3, 1977, unanimously affirmed. Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted. (See *Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Saunders,*52 AD2d 833.) We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious points which could be raised on this appeal. Concur—Fein, J. P., Sullivan, Ross, Silver-man and Carro, JJ.
### Docket No. FAA

- 2015

- 7530

Contacts. With whom outside the FAA has this proposal been discussed?

O rgan i z at i on P er s on C ont a c ted D ate R e s pon s e

N at i o n a l B u s ine s s Aircr af t A ss o ci at i on E li C ott i 12 / 17 / 1 4

Re g i o n a l Airline A ss o ci at i o n 12 / 17 / 14

Aircr af t O w n ers & P il ot s A s s o ci at i o n R o bert Ha ck m a n 12 / 17 / 1 4

Airlines fo r A m erica R o bert I rel a nd 12 / 17 / 1 4
#### HITCHCOCK, Respondent, v. BROOKS, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

May 16, 1906.)

Action by Stephen K. Hitchcock against James Brooks.

PER CTJRIAM.

Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and judgment entered for costs in plaintiff's favor vacated and set aside, and defendant's motion that costs be tared in his favor granted, without costs of said motion.

WILLIAMS, J., not voting.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsOptimal trajectories for an aerospace plane. Part 2: Data, tables, and graphsData, tables, and graphs relative to the optimal trajectories for an aerospace plane are presented. A single-stage-to-orbit (SSTO) configuration is considered, and the transition from low supersonic speeds to orbital speeds is studied for a single aerodynamic model (GHAME) and three engine models. Four optimization problems are solved using the sequential gradient-restoration algorithm for optimal control problems: (1) minimization of the weight of fuel consumed; (2) minimization of the peak dynamic pressure; (3) minimization of the peak heating rate; and (4) minimization of the peak tangential acceleration. The above optimization studies are carried out for different combinations of constraints, specifically: initial path inclination that is either free or given; dynamic pressure that is either free or bounded; and tangential acceleration that is either free or bounded.Document ID19910006698Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeConference PaperAuthorsMiele, Angelo*(Rice Univ. Houston, TX, United States)*Lee, W. Y.*(Rice Univ. Houston, TX, United States)*Wu, G. D.*(Rice Univ. Houston, TX, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateJanuary 1, 1990Subject CategoryAircraft Design, Testing And PerformanceReport/Patent NumberNASA-CR-187848AAR-248-PT-2NAS 1.26:187848Meeting InformationMeeting: 1990 American Control ConferenceLocation: San Diego, CACountry: United StatesStart Date: May 23, 1990End Date: May 25, 1990Accession Number91N16011Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAG1-1029Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19910006698.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 27 (Wednesday, February 10, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 6699]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-2879]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service


Boston Harbor Islands National Recreation Area Advisory Council; 
Notice of Public Meeting

AGENCY: Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Boston 
Harbor Islands National Recreation Area.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a meeting of the Boston Harbor 
Islands National Recreation Area Advisory Council will be held on 
Wednesday, March 3, 2010, at 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. at the Boston Public 
Library, 700 Boylston Street, Boston, MA.
    This will be the annual meeting of the Council. The agenda will 
include a presentation on citizen science activities on the islands, an 
update on the messaging project, elections of officers and other 
council business, a park update, and public comment. The meeting will 
be open to the public. Any person may file with the Superintendent a 
written statement concerning the matters to be discussed. Persons who 
wish to file a written statement at the meeting or who want further 
information concerning the meeting may contact Superintendent Bruce 
Jacobson at Boston Harbor Islands, 408 Atlantic Avenue, Suite 228, 
Boston, MA 02110 or (617) 223-8667. Before including your address, 
phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information 
in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment--
including your personal identifying information--may be made publicly 
available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold 
your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot 
guarantee that we will be able to do so.

DATES: March 3, 2010 at 6 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Boston Public Library, 700 Boylston Street, Boston, MA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Superintendent Bruce Jacobson, (617) 
223-8667.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Advisory Council was appointed by the 
Director of National Park Service pursuant to Public Law 104-333. The 
28 members represent business, educational/cultural, community and 
environmental entities; municipalities surrounding Boston Harbor; 
Boston Harbor advocates; and Native American interests. The purpose of 
the Council is to advise and make recommendations to the Boston Harbor 
Islands Partnership with respect to the development and implementation 
of a management plan and the operations of the Boston Harbor Islands 
NRA.

    Dated: January 15, 2010.
Bruce Jacobson,
Superintendent, Boston Harbor Islands NRA.
[FR Doc. 2010-2879 Filed 2-9-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

OFFICE OF 

AIR AND RADIATION 

MEMORAN DUM 

Subject: 

From: 

To: 

Summary of takeholder Meetings 

Carissa Cyran 

Dockets EPA-HQ-OAR-20 13-0602, EPA-HQ-OAR-20 13-0603. and EPA-HQOAR-20 13-0495 

This memorandum summari zes meetings with stakeholders during the week of July 27,2015. 

On July 27. Administrator Gina McCarthy, Acting Assistant Admi nistrator for Air and Radiation 

Janet McCabe. and Associate Assistant Administrator for Climate and Senior Counsel for Air 

and Radiation Joseph Goffman met with representatives from the Business Roundtable. List of 

attendees attached. 

On Jul y 28, Associate Assistant Administrator for Climate and Senior Counse l for Air and 

Radiation .Joseph Goffman met with Brian Wolff and Quin Shea of the Edison Electric Institute. 

On Jul y 29. Administrator Gina McCarthy spoke with Tom Kuhn of the Edison Electric Institute. 

Internet Address (URLJ · http //www epa gov 

Rccycledi Recyclable • Pronted w11h Vegetable 0•1 Based Inks on 100•1. Postconsumer Process Chlor•ne Free Recycled Paper 
Date: July 27. 2015 

Meeting: Meeting with Business Roundtable Representatives 

Rule(s) Discussed: CPP 

Written Material: No 

Name Title and Organization 

John Engler President, Business Roundtable 

Marian Hopkins Senior Vice President for Poli cy, Business Roundtable 

ick Akins Chairman of the Business Roundtable's (BRT) Energy & Environment 

Committee and CEO of American Electric Power 

Tony Kavanagh enior Vice President for Governmental Affairs. American Electric Power 

Randy Davis tuntz. Davis & Staffier. P.C. 

Janet McCabe EPA 

Joe Goffman EP 1\ 

Administrator Gina McCarthy EPA
#### § 1927.53 Costs of title clearance and closing of transactions.

The borrower or the seller, or both, in compliance with the terms of the sales contract or option will be responsible for payment of all costs of title clearance and closing of the transaction and will arrange for payment before the transaction is closed. These costs will include any costs of abstracts of title, land surveys, attorney's fees, owner's and lender's policies of title insurance, obtaining curative material, notary fees, documentary stamps, recording costs, tax monitoring service, and other expenses necessary to complete the transaction.
Case 3:19-md-02885-MCR-HTC Document 3664 Filed 02/13/23 Page 1 of 5
Case 3:19-md-02885-MCR-HTC Document 3664 Filed 02/13/23 Page 2 of 5
Case 3:19-md-02885-MCR-HTC Document 3664 Filed 02/13/23 Page 3 of 5
Case 3:19-md-02885-MCR-HTC Document 3664 Filed 02/13/23 Page 4 of 5
Case 3:19-md-02885-MCR-HTC Document 3664 Filed 02/13/23 Page 5 of 5
EXHIBIT (21)





SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANT





Registrant owns 100% of the outstanding stock of each of the following corporations:



|Name                                         |  | State of Incorporation
|-------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------
|                                             |  |                       
|Harleysville Insurance Company of Ohio       |  | Ohio                  
|                                             |  |                       
|Harleysville-Atlantic Insurance Company      |  | Georgia               
|                                             |  |                       
|Harleysville Insurance Company of New Jersey |  | New Jersey            
|                                             |  |                       
|Harleysville Preferred Insurance Company     |  | Pennsylvania          
|                                             |  |                       
|Harleysville Lake States Insurance Company   |  | Michigan              
|                                             |  |                       
|Mid-America Insurance Company                |  | Pennsylvania          
|                                             |  |                       
|Harleysville Insurance Company               |  | Minnesota             
|                                             |  |                       
|Harleysville Insurance Company of New York   |  | New York              
|                                             |  |                       
|Harleysville Worcester Insurance Company     |  | Massachusetts         
|                                             |  |
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Santiago Tarrats, Appellant.

Motion to relieve assigned counsel denied. Concur— Birns, J. P., Sandler, Ross, Lynch and Carro, JJ.
2006-0526.

#### State ex rel. Russell v. Thorton.

Wayne App. No. 05CA0082. On motion for stay of court of appeals’ judgment. Motion denied.
#### Trotter vs. Sanders *et al.*

Ejectment. Case 103.

Error (o the Franklin Circuit; Todd, Judge.

*Instruction. JYon suit. Jury.*

When facts c inducing to conclusion are given in evidence, it is error in the court to instruct the jury pprempt.'rih. I'belongs to tho jury to decide.

*JMonroe*and *J\loreheaci, Sanders,*for defendants. for plaintiff; *Hoggin*and

May 3.

Chief Justice Robfrtson

delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is an ejectment. The lessor having proved title, on the trial, the defendants proved facts *conducing*to show that they had entered .and continued to hold under executory contracts of purchase from the lessor: and thereupon the circuit court instructed the jury to find as in case of a non-suit, because the plaintiff had not proved any notice to quit prior to the institution of the suit; and a verdict and judgment were rendered for the defendants accordingly.

As the jury, and not the court, had the right to ascertain the fact of sale, and of entry and possession under it, and as the plaintiff had not proved or admitted that fact, the court erred in giving a peremptory instruction to find for the defendants.

Wherefore, though the princinle recognized in the instruction may he correct, the judgment must be reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial.
**Exhibit31.1**

**Certification**

I, Tony Aquila, ChiefExecutive Officer of Solera Holdings, Inc., certify that:

1. I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q of Solera Holdings, Inc.;

2. Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge,the financial statements, and other financial information included in thisreport, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented in this report;

4. The registrant’sother certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) Evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in thisreport any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant’sother certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whetheror not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: June 25, 2007
|            | /s/ Tony Aquila             |
|------------|-----------------------------|
| ** ** | **Tony Aquila**             |
| ** ** | **Chief Executive Officer** |

 

----
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-40543 Conference Calendar

JUAN JORGE SANCHEZ, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus ORLANDO PEREZ; ET AL., Defendants, DAVID STOCKLEY; SAUL CRUZ; MARTHA VILLAREAL, Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. C-94-CV-180

- - - - - - - - - - December 15, 1999 Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * Juan Jorge Sanchez, a Texas prisoner (# 577512), appeals the magistrate judge’s April 13, 1999, order denying his motion for relief from judgment, filed pursuant to F ED . R. C IV . P. 60(b). Sanchez argues that, in dismissing his civil rights claimsagainst three remaining defendants based on the qualifiedimmunity doctrine, the magistrate judge erred in failing toNo. 99-40543 -2- consider the requirements of Hudson v. McMillian , 503 U.S. 1 (1992). Sanchez is essentially arguing that the magistrate judge committed a legal error, or a “mistake” under Rule 60(b)(1). A motion under Rule 60(b)(1) must be brought within one year after the judgment or order to be challenged is entered. See Rule 60(b). Sanchez’s Rule 60(b) motion was not filed until April 1999, when the judgment he is challenging was entered in October 1997. Not only did the magistrate judge did not abuse her discretion in denying Sanchez’s Rule 60(b) motion, see Carimi v. Royal Carribean Cruise Line, Inc. , 959 F.2d 1344, 1345 (5th Cir. 1992), but Sanchez’s appeal is frivolous. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2. Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED. For purposes of the “three-strikes” provision, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), Sanchez had already accumulated at least four strikes prior to the issuance of the instant opinion. See Sanchez v. Biery , No. 98-50423 (5th Cir. Aug. 25, 1999); Sanchez v. T. West , No. 97-40940 (5th Cir. June 16, 1998); Sanchez v. Putska , No. 95- 20917 (5th Cir. March 1, 1996). We dispose of the instant appeal on the merits because the Biery opinion, No. 98-50423, was issued after Sanchez had filed the instant appeal. The instant dismissal counts as an additional strike. Accordingly, Sanchez is again notified that he may not proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See § 1915(g). APPEAL DISMISSED. 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2. SANCTION IMPOSED UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).