alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 29.2394 Rule 3.

In drawing an official sample from a hogshead or other package of tobacco, two or more breaks shall be made at such points and in such manner as the inspector or sampler may find necessary to determine the kinds of tobacco and the percentage of each kind contained in the lot. All breaks shall be made so that the tobacco contained in the center of the package is visible to the sampler. Tobacco shall be drawn from at least two breaks from which a representative sample shall be selected.
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE


SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Annual Report of Epolin, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended February 28, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), the undersigned certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of the undersigned’s knowledge, that:





(1)           The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





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





Dated: May 31, 2011
By:
/s/ Greg AmatoGreg Amato,Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)Dated: May 31, 2011
By:
/s/ James IvchenkoJames Ivchenko,President(Principal Financial Officer)
BNL 52582 National Synchrotron Light Source Activity Report 1999

1999

Activity Repor Activity Repor Activity Report

Brookhaven National Laborator ookhaven National Laborator ookhaven National Laboratory

National Synchr National Synchr National Synchrotron Light Sour on Light Sour on Light Source
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

JACKY GILBERT,

Petitioner,

v. Case No. 4:20-cv-135-AW-MAF

RICKY D. DIXON,

Respondent.

_______________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

I have considered the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation. ECF 

No. 15. I have also considered de novo the issues raised in Petitioner’s timely 

objection. ECF No. 21. The objection mainly offers reargument, but it also contends 

that the state 3.850 judge’s comments about his familiarity with the case “provides 

an extreme like[lihood] of judicial bias and a need for independent federal review 

and an evidentiary hearing.” ECF No. 21 at 5-6. This argument was not presented to 

the magistrate judge and, even if it were, does not change the outcome. For the 

reasons the magistrate judge sets out, Petitioner has not shown that the state court’s 

decision was contrary to or an unreasonable application of Strickland.

It is now ORDERED:

1. The Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 15) is adopted and 

incorporated into this order.

2. Petitioner’s objections (ECF No. 21) are overruled.

Case 4:20-cv-00135-AW-MJF Document 22 Filed 06/03/22 Page 1 of 2
2

3. The clerk will enter a judgment that says, “The § 2254 petition is 

denied.”

4. A certificate of appealability is DENIED.

5. The clerk will close the file.

SO ORDERED on June 3, 2022. 

s/ Allen Winsor

United States District Judge

Case 4:20-cv-00135-AW-MJF Document 22 Filed 06/03/22 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET OF WINDSOR PARK PROPERTIES 4 AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND THE RELATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS, PARTNER'S EQUITY AND CASH FLOWS FOR THE YEAR THEN
ENDED AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                       1,105,200
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                       6,585,400
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,148,900
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,815,900
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                      1,775,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,969,700<F1>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,815,900
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,349,800
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  728,900
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               339,100
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             137,400
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                144,400
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            144,400
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   144,400
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.72<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>LIMITED AND GENERAL PARTNERS EQUITY
<F2>NET INCOME PER LIMITED PARTNERSHIP UNIT
</FN>


</TABLE>
```

[108th Congress Public Law 407]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[DOCID: f:publ407.108]
Public Law 108-407
108th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
  11110 Sunset Hills Road in Reston, Virginia, as the ``Martha Pennino 
     Post Office Building''. <<NOTE: Oct. 30, 2004 -  [H.R. 5133]>> 

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 11110 
Sunset Hills Road in Reston, Virginia, shall be known and designated as 
the ``Martha Pennino Post Office Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Martha Pennino Post Office 
Building''.

    Approved October 30, 2004.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 5133:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 150 (2004):
            Sept. 28, considered and passed House.
            Oct. 10, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
§ 301.38-5 Assembly and inspection of regulated articles: issuance and cancellation of certificates. ( a ) Any person, other than a person authorized to issue certificates under paragraph (c) of this section, who desires to move interstate a regulated article that must be accompanied by a certificate under § 301.38-4(b), shall, as far in advance of the desired interstate movement as possible (and no less than 48 hours before the desired interstate movement), request an inspector[1] to issue a certificate. To expedite the issuance of a certificate, an inspector may direct that the regulated articles be assembled in a manner that facilitates inspection.
( b ) An inspector may issue a certificate for the interstate movement of a regulated article if he or she: ( 1 ) Determines, upon examination, that the regulated article may be moved interstate in accordance with this subpart; and
( 2 ) Determines that the regulated article may be moved interstate in accordance with all other Federal domestic plant quarantines and regulations applicable to the regulated article.
( c ) Certificates for interstate movement of regulated articles may be issued by an inspector to a person operating under a compliance agreement for use with subsequent shipments of regulated articles to facilitate their movement. A person operating under a compliance agreement must make the determinations set forth in paragraph (b) of this section before shipping any regulated articles.
( d ) Any certificate that has been issued may be withdrawn by an inspector, orally or in writing, if he or she determines that the holder of the certificate has not complied with the conditions of this subpart for the use of the certificate. If the withdrawal is oral, the inspector will confirm the withdrawal and the reasons for the withdrawal, in writing, within 20 days of oral notification of the withdrawal. Any person whose certificate has been withdrawn may appeal the decision, in writing within 10 days after receiving written notification of the withdrawal. The appeal must state all of the facts and reasons upon which the person relies to show that the certificate was wrongfully withdrawn. A hearing will be held to resolve any conflict as to any material fact. An appeal shall be granted or denied, in writing, as promptly as circumstances allow, and the reasons for the decision shall be stated. In a non-protected area, appeal shall be made to the Administrator. The Administrator shall adopt rules of practice for the hearing. The certificate will remain withdrawn pending decision of the appeal.
[54 FR 32791, Aug. 10, 1989, as amended at 59 FR 67608, Dec. 30, 1994; 67 FR 8180, Feb. 22, 2002; 88 FR 80005, Dec. 29, 2022] Footnotes -
301.38-5
[1] Services of an inspector may be requested by contacting a local APHIS office (listed in telephone directories under Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), Plant Protection and Quarantine). The addresses and telephone numbers of local offices may also be obtained by writing to the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine, Domestic and Emergency Operations, 4700 River Road Unit 134, Riverdale, Maryland 20737-1236.
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF
THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with Warner Chilcott Limiteds Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2008 (the Report) for the purpose of
complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.

Roger M. Boissonneault, the Chief Executive Officer and Paul Herendeen, the Chief Financial Officer of Warner Chilcott Limited, each certifies that, to
the best of his knowledge:



| | 1. | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Warner Chilcott Limited.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: November 10, 2008



/s/ Roger M. BoissonneaultName:

Roger M. BoissonneaultTitle:

President and Chief Executive Officer




/s/ Paul HerendeenName:

Paul HerendeenTitle:

Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Warner Chilcott Limited and will be retained by
Warner Chilcott Limited and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Local 50, Bakery, Confectionery and Tobacco Workers Union, AFL-CIO, Respondent, v American Bakeries Company, Appellant.

— Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered September 28, 1979, which, *inter alia,*granted the petition to vacate an arbitration award, unanimously reversed, on the law, with costs and disbursements, the petition dismissed, and the cross motion to confirm granted. Contrary to Special Term’s finding, the arbitrator’s determination that there was a transfer of operations, rather than a plant closing within the intended application of the severance pay provision of the collective bargaining agreement, was not irrational. The construction of the collective bargaining agreement was a function of the arbitrator, not the court. Nor did the arbitrator exceed his authority by admitting parol evidence as to the intention of the parties with respect to the severance pay provision. "Absent provision to the contrary in the arbitration agreement, arbitrators are not bound by principles of substantive law or rules of evidence”. *(Matter of Associated Teachers of Huntington v Board of Educ.,*33 NY2d 229, 235, citing *Lentine v Fundaro,*29 NY2d 382, 385, and cases there cited.) Moreover, and in any event, the parol evidence rule has no application to a subsequent agreement, and the rule does not exclude parol evidence of a subsequent modification or discharge of a written agreement. *(Haight v Cohen,*123 App Div 707.) Concur — Sandler, J. P., Sullivan, Bloom, Silver-man and Ross, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 226 (Wednesday, November 24, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 71559-71560]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29630]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 261

[EPA-R06-RCRA-2010-0066; SW FRL-9231-4]


Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of 
Hazardous Waste; Withdrawal of Direct Final Exclusion

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Withdrawal of direct final exclusion.

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

SUMMARY: Because EPA received adverse comments, we are withdrawing the 
direct final exclusion for ExxonMobil Refining and Supply Company--
Beaumont Refinery, published on October 1, 2010.

DATES: Effective November 24, 2010, EPA withdraws the direct final 
exclusion published at 75 FR 60632, on October 1, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Peace, Environmental 
Protection Agency, Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, RCRA 
Branch, Mail Code: 6PD-C, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202, by

[[Page 71560]]

calling (214) 665-7430 or by e-mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0373666260662d6e6a606b666f6f66436673622d646c75"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="6010050103054e0d090308050c0c05200510014e070f16">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Because EPA received adverse comments, we 
are withdrawing the direct final exclusion for ExxonMobil Refining and 
Supply Company--Beaumont Refinery, published on October 1, 2010, 75 FR 
60632. We stated that in the direct final rule that if we received 
adverse comment by November 1, 2010, the direct final rule would not 
take effect and we would publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal 
Register. We subsequently received adverse comment on that direct final 
rule. We will address the comments submitted in a subsequent final 
action which will be based on the parallel proposed rule also published 
on October 1, 2010, 75 FR 60689. As stated in the direct final rule and 
the parallel proposed rule, we will not institute a second comment 
period on this action.

    Dated: November 16, 2010.
Bill Luthans,
Acting Director, Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division.

0
Accordingly, the amendments to the rule published on October 1, 2010, 
75 FR 60632 are withdrawn as of November 24, 2010 until an action 
making the exclusion final is published.
[FR Doc. 2010-29630 Filed 11-23-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
(May 15, 1980)

#### In the Matter of the Estate of David Haim, Deceased. Letty Fund, Appellant; Robert V. Haim, as Ancillary Administrator of the Estate of David Haim, Deceased, Respondent.

Orders, Surrogate’s Court, New York County, entered on September 5, 1979, unanimously affirmed on the opinion of Midonick, S., without costs and without disbursements. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Kupferman, Fein, Sandler and Silverman, JJ.
### Notes from Meeting with **Bob Spurgin**

**Attended by:** Spurgin and Associates : Bob Spurgin EPA Staff: Kristin Fitzgerald **Date:** June 25 , 2013 EPA had a call with Bob Spurgin . He discussed the variation in what sorts of pharmaceutical wastes that publicly

owned treatment works (POTWs) will accept from healthcare facilities. He mentioned that one POTW in San Francisco is allowing aqueous pharmaceuticals to be discharged to it. He also discussed the ty pical management of “fully - dosed” (or empty) s y ringes.
Seguridad para Niños Pasajeros

T A R JETA INFORMATIVA PARA LOS PADRES

CRECIENDO

SEGUROS:

4 Etapas de 

Seguridad 

para Niños.

A medida que los niños

crecen, la manera 

de sentarlos en su 

vehículo cambia. Siga

estas 4 etapas para

reducir la posibilidad de

que su hijo sufra 

una lesión o muera.

1

2

3

4

ASIENTO DE

SEGURIDAD PARA

BEBÉS INSTALADO

MIRANDO 

HACIA ATRÁS

ASIENTO DE

SEGURIDAD PARA

NIÑOS INSTALADO

MIRANDO HACIA

ADELANTE

ASIENTO ELEVADO

“BOOSTER”

CINTURÓN DE

SEGURIDAD

Colóquelo en el asiento trasero

para los niños de un año y 20 libras

hasta aproximadamente cuatro

años de edad y 40 libras.

NIÑO 

BEBÉ

ASIENTO ELEVADO

CINTURÓN DE SEGURIDAD

Colóquelo en el asiento trasero para

los bebés recién nacidos y hasta

aproximadamente un año de edad y

que pesen por lo menos 20 libras.

Use los asientos elevados “boosters” 

en el asiento trasero para los niños de

cuatro hasta al rededor de ocho años de

edad a menos que el niño mida 4’9’’.

Use los cinturones de seguridad en el

asiento trasero para los niños de ocho

años en adelante o si miden más de 4’9”.

Recuerde: Todos los niños de 12 años o menores deben viajar siempre en el asiento trasero.
¡Busque Ayuda!

EN LA INTERNET

Visite www.nhtsa.dot.gov y escoja la sección de seguridad de niños pasajeros

(child passenger safety) en el menú u oprima el logotipo del asiento de

seguridad. Este sitio Web contiene recomendaciones de cómo instalar un

asiento de seguridad para niños, información acerca de cada asiento de venta

en el mercado, cuáles asientos han sido retirados del mercado por defectos, y

otra información útil. 

CERCA DE USTED

Un técnico en instalación de asientos de seguridad para niños certificado

puede revisar cómo usted instaló su asiento de seguridad y contestar

cualquier pregunta. Para encontrar a un técnico o una estación de inspección

de asientos de seguridad cercana a usted, visite www.nhtsa.dot.gov, oprima

el logotipo del asiento de seguridad y después oprima en inspecciones de

asientos de seguridad o visite www.seatcheck.org

POR TELÉFONO

Para más información acerca de asientos de seguridad para niños, asientos

elevados “booster,” estaciones de instalación/inspección en su área,

cinturones de seguridad, bolsas de aire y otros asuntos de seguridad en las

carreteras llame a la línea de información del Departamento de Transporte al 

1-888-327-4236.
#### In the Matter of the City of New York, Respondent, Relative to Acquiring Title to Real Property for a Project Known as the Staten Island Industrial Park, in the Borough of Richmond. Fred P. Goldhirsh, Appellant.

— In a condemnation proceeding, the claimant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated November 16, 1977, which granted petitioner’s motion to (1) quash a subpoena duces tecum and (2) vacate a notice of deposition. Appeal dismissed, with $50 costs and disbursements payable to respondent. No appeal lies from an intermediate order in a condemnation proceeding brought under the Administrative Code (Administrative Code of City of New York, § B15-25.0; *Matter of City of New York [Cohan],*12 AD2d 745). Mollen, P. J., Damiani, Lazer and Margett, JJ., concur.
```

[108th Congress Public Law 319]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[DOCID: f:publ319.108]

[[Page 118 STAT. 1212]]

Public Law 108-319
108th Congress

                                 An Act

 
           To extend the term of the Forest Counties Payments 
            Committee. <<NOTE: Oct. 5, 2004 -  [H.R. 3249]>> 

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

SECTION 1. <<NOTE: 16 USC 500 note.>> EXTENSION OF TERM OF FOREST 
            COUNTIES PAYMENTS COMMITTEE.

    Effective <<NOTE: Effective date.>> as of October 11, 2003, section 
320(e) of the Department of the Interior and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act, 2001 (Public Law 106-291; 114 Stat. 994; 16 U.S.C. 
500 note), is amended by striking ``three years after the date of the 
enactment of this Act'' and inserting ``on September 30, 2007''.

    Approved October 5, 2004.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 3249:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD:
                                                        Vol. 149 (2003):
                                    Oct. 28, considered and passed 
                                        House.
                                                        Vol. 150 (2004):
                                    Sept. 15, considered and passed 
                                        Senate.

                                  <all>
```
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v. 4:89cr4013-WS

THEODORE COCKRAN,

Defendant.

 

ORDER DENYING "MOVANT'S MOTION IN OPPOSITION

TO THE GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE"

Before the court is "Movant's Motion in Opposition to the Government's

Response." Doc. 455. In essence, the motion is an unauthorized reply to the

government's response to the defendant's motion for reconsideration filed on

September 16, 2013. See N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 7.1(C)(2) (providing that "[n]o reply

memoranda shall be filed absent a showing of good cause and upon leave of the

court"). Because the defendant has not shown good cause to support the filing of a

reply, it is ORDERED:

The defendant's "Motion in Opposition to the Government's Response" (doc.

455) is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 13th day of November , 2013.
Page 2 of 2

s/ William Stafford 

WILLIAM STAFFORD

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
#### § 3201.58 [Reserved]