alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1776.8 Methods for submitting applications. ( a ) Applications may be filed in either paper or electronic format. RUS will not accept applications by fax or e-mail.
( b ) Paper applications for DWS grants may be delivered by the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) or courier delivery services. Applications submitted by mail or courier must be postmarked no later than the filing deadline to be considered for the grant period. Applications delivered by mail or courier must be addressed to the attention of the Assistant Administrator, Water and Environmental Programs as follows: ATTN: Assistant Administrator, WEP, Rural Utilities Service, Stop 1548 Room 5145 South, 1400 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20250-1548.
( c ) Electronic applications may be filed through Grants.gov, the official Federal Government Web site at *http://www.grants.gov .* The applicant must be registered with Grants.gov before they can submit a grant applicant. The applicant should refer to instructions found on the Grants.gov Web site for procedures for registering and using this facility. An applicant who is not registered on Grants.gov should allow a sufficient number of business days to complete the process. Applications submitted electronically must be show an electronic date and time stamp on or before the filing deadline to be considered for the grant period.
( d ) The methods of submitting applications may be changed from time to reflect changes in addresses and electronic submission procedures. The applicant should refer to the most recent FOA for notice of any such changes. In the event of any discrepancy, the most recent FOA must be followed.
[70 FR 28788, May 19, 2005, as amended as 83 FR 45033, Sept. 5, 2018]
#### Ohio Consumers’ Counsel, Appellant, *v.*Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, Appellee.

[Cite as *Ohio Consumers’ Counsel v. Pub. Util. Comm.,*109 Ohio St.3d 511, 2006-Ohio-3054.]

(No. 2005-0767

Submitted May 24, 2006

Decided July 5, 2006.)

Janine L. Migden-Ostrander, Ohio Consumers’ Counsel, and Kimberly W. Bojko and Jeffrey L. Small, Assistant Consumers’ Counsel, for appellant.

Jim Petro, Attorney General, Duane W. Luckey, Senior Deputy Attorney General, and William L. Wright and Steven T. Nourse, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee.

Porter Wright Morris & Arthur, L.L.P., and Daniel R. Conway; Marvin I. Resnick, Kevin F. Duffy, and Sandra K. Williams, for intervening appellees Columbus Southern Power Company and Ohio Power Company.

{¶ 1} Based on the second proposition of law in appellant’s brief and our decision in *Ohio Consumers’ Counsel v. Pub. Util. Comm.,*109 Ohio St.3d 328, 2006-Ohio-2110, 847 N.E.2d 1184, the decision of the Public Utilities Commission is vacated, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with that decision. This order does not preclude appellant from raising its first, third, fourth, and fifth propositions of law in a future appeal from the Public Utilities Commission.

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell and Lanzinger, JJ., concur.
|  |  |  |  |  |
|--|--|--|--|--|
|  |  |  |  |

  South Dakota

> - Enemy Swim
- Rapid City

----
###### Editorial Note on Part 1956

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1956 appear at 80 FR 9901, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### §§ 1956.76-1956.83 [Reserved]
#### Fehlhaber Corporation et al., Respondents, v State of New York, Appellant.

(Claim No. 54855.)

by appellant for reargument or, in the alternative, for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeals, denied, without costs. Motion to resettle order of this court, entered August 24, 1979, granted, without costs, and order resettled by adding thereto an additional decretal paragraph as follows: "ordered, that execution of the judgment of the Court of Claims, as modified, be stayed to the extent of $718,777.63 pending final determination of the appellant’s counterclaim for remedial work performed after July 1, 1971, temporary heat supplied after July 1, 1971, and miscellaneous costs.” Mahoney, P. J., Sweeney, Kane and Main, JJ., concur.
§ 1c.114 Cooperative Research. ( a ) Cooperative research projects are those projects covered by this policy that involve more than one institution. In the conduct of cooperative research projects, each institution is responsible for safeguarding the rights and welfare of human subjects and for complying with this policy.
( b ) ( 1 ) Any institution located in the United States that is engaged in cooperative research must rely upon approval by a single IRB for that portion of the research that is conducted in the United States. The reviewing IRB will be identified by the Federal department or agency supporting or conducting the research or proposed by the lead institution subject to the acceptance of the Federal department or agency supporting the research.
( 2 ) The following research is not subject to this provision: ( i ) Cooperative research for which more than single IRB review is required by law (including tribal law passed by the official governing body of an American Indian or Alaska Native tribe); or
( ii ) Research for which any Federal department or agency supporting or conducting the research determines and documents that the use of a single IRB is not appropriate for the particular context.
( c ) For research not subject to paragraph (b) of this section, an institution participating in a cooperative project may enter into a joint review arrangement, rely on the review of another IRB, or make similar arrangements for avoiding duplication of effort.
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 2012 - 0356 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 2011 - SW - 067 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: **Next Step:** FRAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, lis t latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter togeth er. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR- M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree w ith because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch M anager**  **Date**
2005-1874.

#### State v. Brown.

Lucas App. No. L-04-1148, 2005-Ohio-4348. Reported at 109 Ohio St.3d 313, 2006-Ohio-2109, 847 N.E.2d 1174. On motion for reconsideration. Motion denied.
M. P. No. 79-299.

#### Nathan M. Honig *v.*General Motors Corporation *et al.*

Mr. Justice Weisberger did not participate.

*Gunning, LaFazia & Gnys, Inc., Netti C. Vogel,*for petitioner. *Higgins, Cavanagh 6- Cooney, Gerald C. DeMaria,*for respondent.

The petition for writ of certiorari is denied.
----

----

|   | (1)    | The      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                                                                                                                                                   |
|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     |
|   | (2)    | The      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the      dates presented and the consolidated result of operations of the Company      for the periods presented. |

| Dated:       November 14, 2008                  |   |
|------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                                 |   |
| /s/       Dongliang Su                     |   |
| Dongliang      SuActing      Chief Financial Officer |

----
Patrizio
      & Zhao, LLCCertified
      Public Accountants and Consultants
              
              322
      Route 46 WestParsippany,
      NJ 07054Tel:  (973)
      882-8810Fax:
      (973) 882-0788www.pzcpa.com
   December
11, 2008
 
 U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission
 Division
of Corporate Finance
 100 F.
Street, N.E.
 Washington,
D.C. 20549
 
 
 To Whom
It May Concern:
 
 We are
aware that JPAK Group, Inc. has included our report dated February 11, 2008,
(Except for Note 1, 15, 16, 17 and 18, as to which the date is December 11,
2008), in its 10Q/A for the quarter ended December 31, 2007. We are also aware
of our responsibilities under the Securities Act of 1933.
 
 Yours
truly,
 
 
 
 /s/ Patrizio & Zhao,
LLC
 Patrizio
& Zhao, LLC
 
 
 PATRIZIO
& ZHAO, LLC
 Certified
Public Accountants and Consultants
 
 Parsippany,
New Jersey
<XBRL>
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="us-ascii"?>
<!--XBRL document created with Toppan Merrill Bridge  10.4.0.13 -->
<!--Based on XBRL 2.1-->
<!--Created on: 10/31/2023 8:22:40 PM-->
<!--Modified on: 10/31/2023 8:22:40 PM-->
<xsd:schema targetNamespace="http://nl.com/20231026" attributeFormDefault="unqualified" elementFormDefault="qualified" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:currency="http://xbrl.sec.gov/currency/2022" xmlns:dei="http://xbrl.sec.gov/dei/2022" xmlns:us-roles="http://fasb.org/us-roles/2022" xmlns:ref="http://www.xbrl.org/2006/ref" xmlns:xbrldt="http://xbrl.org/2005/xbrldt" xmlns:xl="http://www.xbrl.org/2003/XLink" xmlns:sic="http://xbrl.sec.gov/sic/2022" xmlns:us-types="http://fasb.org/us-types/2022" xmlns:srt-roles="http://fasb.org/srt-roles/2022" xmlns:stpr="http://xbrl.sec.gov/stpr/2022" xmlns:utr="http://www.xbrl.org/2009/utr" xmlns:us-gaap="http://fasb.org/us-gaap/2022" xmlns:link="http://www.xbrl.org/2003/linkbase" xmlns:srt-types="http://fasb.org/srt-types/2022" xmlns:exch="http://xbrl.sec.gov/exch/2022" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:naics="http://xbrl.sec.gov/naics/2022" xmlns:country="http://xbrl.sec.gov/country/2022" xmlns:negated="http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/negated" xmlns:attributeFormDefault="unqualified" xmlns:xbrli="http://www.xbrl.org/2003/instance" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:srt="http://fasb.org/srt/2022" xmlns:enum2="http://xbrl.org/2020/extensible-enumerations-2.0" xmlns:dtr-types="http://www.xbrl.org/dtr/type/2020-01-21" xmlns:deprecated="http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/deprecated" xmlns:net="http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/net" xmlns:nl="http://nl.com/20231026" xmlns:dtr="http://www.xbrl.org/2009/dtr" xmlns:cef="http://xbrl.sec.gov/cef/2022" xmlns:xbrldi="http://xbrl.org/2006/xbrldi">
  <xsd:annotation>
    <xsd:appinfo>
      <link:roleType roleURI="http://nl.com/role/DocumentDocumentAndEntityInformation" id="DocumentDocumentAndEntityInformation">
        <link:definition>00090 - Document - Document and Entity Information</link:definition>
        <link:usedOn>link:presentationLink</link:usedOn>
        <link:usedOn>link:calculationLink</link:usedOn>
        <link:usedOn>link:definitionLink</link:usedOn>
      </link:roleType>
      <link:linkbaseRef xlink:type="simple" xlink:href="nl-20231026_pre.xml" xlink:role="http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationLinkbaseRef" xlink:arcrole="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink/properties/linkbase" />
      <link:linkbaseRef xlink:type="simple" xlink:href="nl-20231026_lab.xml" xlink:role="http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/labelLinkbaseRef" xlink:arcrole="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink/properties/linkbase" />
    </xsd:appinfo>
  </xsd:annotation>
  <xsd:import namespace="http://www.xbrl.org/2003/instance" schemaLocation="http://www.xbrl.org/2003/xbrl-instance-2003-12-31.xsd" />
  <xsd:import namespace="http://xbrl.org/2005/xbrldt" schemaLocation="http://www.xbrl.org/2005/xbrldt-2005.xsd" />
  <xsd:import namespace="http://xbrl.sec.gov/dei/2022" schemaLocation="https://xbrl.sec.gov/dei/2022/dei-2022.xsd" />
</xsd:schema>
</XBRL>
§ 1822.265 Loan purposes. RHS loans may be made to qualified applicants: ( a ) For the purchase and development of adequate sites, including the construction of essential access roads, streets, utility lines, and necessary equipment which will become a permanent part of the development. If public water and waste disposal facilities are not available and cannot reasonably be provided on a community basis with other financing, including Water and Waste Disposal Association loans, funds may be included for this purpose.
( b ) For the payment of necessary engineering fees, legal fees, and closing costs.
( c ) For the payment of actual cash cost of incidental administrative expenses such as postage, telephone, advertising, and temporary secretarial help, if funds to pay these expenses are not otherwise available. The estimated cost of these items should be identified and shown in the budget.
( d ) To provide for needed landscaping, planting, seeding, or sodding, or other necessary facilities related to buildings such as walks, parking areas, and driveways.
( e ) When legally required by proper local, county, and State Governmental bodies as a condition for subdivision approval, RHS loan funds may be used to provide common areas playgrounds and tot lots, provided such facilities are dedicated to, and maintained by, a public body.
(42 U.S.C. 1480; delegation of authority by the Sec. of Agri., 7 CFR 2.23; delegation of authority by the Asst. Sec. for Rural Development, 7 CFR 2.70)
[35 FR 16087, July 1, 1970, as amended at 43 FR 24264, June 5, 1978; 80 FR 9866, Feb. 24, 2015]
MEMO TO FILE: PHONE CALL WITH ROBERTCLEAVES, BPA 9/17/2014 AND GEORGE FAISON DISCUSS STATUS OF PROPOSED RULE ON C&D WOOD, PRRS, RR TIES.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

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 American Tire Distributors Holdings, Inc., a
Delaware corporation (the Company), hereby certifies that, to his best knowledge:



| | (a) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 (the Report) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (b) | information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                    |  |        |  |                                                     
|------------------- |  | ------ |  | ----------------------------------------------------
|Dated: May 15, 2007 |  | By:    |  | /s/    RICHARD P.
JOHNSON                           
|                    |  | Name:  |  | Richard P. Johnson                                  
|                    |  | Title: |  | Chairman and Chief Executive Officer                
|                    |  |       
|                    |  | By:    |  | /s/    DAVID L.
DYCKMAN                             
|                    |  | Name:  |  | David L. Dyckman                                    
|                    |  | Title: |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
**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)**

| Dated: | August                21, 2006 |                                                         |   | /s/                Howard S. Balter |   |
|--------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------|--------|
|   |                           |                                                         |   | Howard                S. Balter     |   |
|   |                           | Chief                Executive Officer                       |   |
|   |                           | (Principal                Executive Officer )                |   |
|   |                           |                                                         |   |
| Dated: | August                21, 2006 |                                                         |   | /s/                Ilan M. Slasky   |   |
|   |                           |                                                         |   | Ilan                M. Slasky       |   |
|   |                           | President                                                    |   |
|   |                           | (Principal                Financial and Accounting Officer ) |   |
| D      |                           |                                                         |   |

----
## State of N ew York Su p reme C ou rt, A p p ellate Division Third J u dicial Dep artment Decided and Entered: September 24, 2015 519878

________________________________ In the Matter of ROBERT DEAN, Petitioner, v MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN, as Attorney General, et al., Respondents.

________________________________ Calendar Date: August 10, 2015 Before: McCarthy, J.P., Rose, Lynch and Clark, JJ.

__________ Robert Dean, Dannemora, petitioner pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Peter H. Schiff of counsel), for respondents.

__________ Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules. Determination confirmed. No opinion. McCarthy, J.P., Rose, Lynch and Clark, JJ., concur.-2- 519878

ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger Clerk of the Court
#### Michael Laurence et al., Appellants, v Alvin R. Corwin et al., Respondents.

In an action against a securities brokerage house and its registered representative to recover damages arising out of defendants’ alleged fraudulent representations and negligence, plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered May 4, 1979, which granted defendants’ motion pursuant to CPLR 7503 (subd [a]) to compel arbitration and stayed the action pending such arbitration. Order reversed, on the law, with $50 costs and disbursements, defendants’ motion is denied and plaintiffs are granted leave to serve an amended complaint within 20 days after service upon them of a copy of the order to be made hereon, together with notice of entry thereof. A customer’s claims against a broker are not subject to compulsory arbitration, notwithstanding an arbitration clause in the agreement between the customer and the broker, where the customer’s claims arise under the Securities Act of 1933 *(Wilko v Swan,*346 US 427). The complaint herein presents such claims. For the purpose of this motion to compel arbitration, it is not important that the Securities Act was not expressly pleaded, "for judicial notice of the Acts of Congress must be taken by state courts” *(Dowski v Merritt-Chapman & Scott Corp.,*65 NYS2d 890, 891, affd 271 App Div 874; cf. *Niagara Falls Power Co. v White,*292 NY 472, 479-480). Nor is it important that the complaint did not allege the interstate commerce element necessary to bring the action under the Securities Act, for leave to amend the complaint to allege this element can be granted (see *New York Cent. R.R. v Kinney,*260 US 340; *Dowski v*
      *841
      *Merritt-Chapman & Scott Corp., supra).*Finally, since the same acts are involved whether the claims be under the common law or the Securities Act, the motion to compel arbitration must be denied even as regards the common law claims (see *Sibley v Tandy Corp.,*543 F2d 540, 543, cert den 434 US 824; *Shapiro v Jaslow,*320 F Supp 598). Rabin, J. P., Gulotta, Cohalan and Margett, JJ., concur.
###### Editorial Note on Part 1956

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1956 appear at 80 FR 9901, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### §§ 1956.146-1956.147 [Reserved]
#### MANTHAI, Appellant, v. ERIE, R. CO. et al., Respondents.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

June 22, 1906.)

Action by Emma K. Manthai, as administratrix of the goods, chattels, and credit of Herman C. Manthai, deceased, against the Erie Railroad Company, impleaded.

No opinion. Motion denied.
M. P. No. 79-434.

#### State *v.*John A. Santilli.

The petition for writ of certiorari is denied.

*899Mr. Justice Doris did not participate.

*Stephen*A. *Lichatin III,*Assistant Attorney General, for plaintiff-respondent. *John F. Cicilline,*for defendant-petitioner.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1844
WILLIAM G. ROBINSON, Lieutenant, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CITY OF GREENVILLE; DAVID HENDERSON, Captain, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge. (CA-02-2533-26BI) Submitted: February 7, 2005 Decided: March 1, 2005 Before TRAXLER, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Wm. Gary White, III, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. Deborah Casey Brown, GALLIVAN, WHITE & BOYD, P.A., Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: William G. Robinson appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and granting summary judgment in favor of his employer and a former supervisor on his claims alleging race discrimination in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (2000), retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a) (2000), and violations of his constitutional rights to equal protection and free speech in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court and the magistrate judge. See Robinson v. City of Greenville, No. CA-02-2533-26BI (D.S.C. Apr. 23, 2004 and May 26, 2004). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED