alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 301.48-8 Compliance agreements and cancellation. ( a ) Any person engaged in the business of moving regulated articles may enter into a compliance agreement to facilitate the movement of such articles under this subpart. Any person who enters into a compliance agreement, and employees or agents of that person, must allow an inspector access to all records regarding treatment of aircraft and to all areas where loading, unloading, and treatment of aircraft occurs.
( b ) A compliance agreement may be canceled by an inspector, orally or in writing, whenever he or she determines that the person who has entered into the compliance agreement has failed to comply with the agreement or this subpart. If the cancellation is oral, the cancellation and the reasons for the cancellation will be confirmed in writing within 20 days of oral notification. Any person whose compliance agreement has been canceled may appeal the decision, in writing, to the Administrator within 10 days after receiving written notification of the cancellation. The appeal must state all of the facts and reasons upon which the person relies to show that the compliance agreement was wrongfully canceled. A hearing will be held to resolve any conflict as to any material fact. The Administrator shall adopt rules of practice for the hearing. An appeal shall be granted or denied, in writing, as promptly as circumstances allow, and the reasons for the decision shall be stated. The compliance agreement will remain canceled pending the decision on the appeal.
[61 FR 32641, June 25, 1996]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>  5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM EPOLIN,
INC.'S ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED FEBRUARY 29, 2000 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               FEB-28-2000
<PERIOD-END>                    FEB-28-2000
<CASH>                          1,182,937
<SECURITIES>                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                   288,836
<ALLOWANCES>                    0
<INVENTORY>                     475,215
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                2,096,333
<PP&E>                          1,107,050
<DEPRECIATION>                  648,937
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  2,669,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           402,343
<BONDS>                         0
<COMMON>                        2,220,384
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0
<PREFERRED>                     0
<OTHER-SE>                      0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    2,669,000
<SALES>                         1,926,992
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                1,926,992
<CGS>                           501,437
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   501,437
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                745,743
<LOSS-PROVISION>                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 729,892
<INCOME-TAX>                    350,334
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             379,558
<DISCONTINUED>                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0
<CHANGES>                       0
<NET-INCOME>                    379,558
<EPS-BASIC>                   .03
<EPS-DILUTED>                   .03



</TABLE>
#### § 29.2549 Size.

The length of tobacco leaves. Size does not apply to tobacco in strip form. (See chart, § 29.2606.)

[37 FR 13626, July 12, 1972. Redesignated and amended at 49 FR 16757, Apr. 20, 1984 and further redesignated at 51 FR 40406, Nov. 7, 1986]
1 The Honorable Harold D. Vietor, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 01-3195

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the v. * Southern District of Iowa. * Jorge Mireles-Torres, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: April 4, 2002 Filed: April 9, 2002

___________ Before LOKEN, BYE, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Jorge Mireles-Torres appeals the sentence imposed by the district court 1 upon his guilty plea to illegal reentry following deportation for an aggravated felony, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2). Pursuant to Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief raising the issue whether Mireles-Torres’s sentence is too harsh.-2- At sentencing, Mireles-Torres raised no objection to the accuracy of the presentence report’s facts and Guidelines calculations, and the sentence imposed-- also without objection--was at the bottom of the applicable Guidelines range. His argument on appeal is unreviewable. See 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a); cf. United States v. Woodrum , 959 F.2d 100, 101 (8th Cir. 1992) (per curiam) (sentence is not reviewable merely because it is at top of properly calculated Guidelines range). Having reviewed the record independently pursuant to Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
§ 3560.254 Eligibility for rental assistance. ( a ) *Eligible housing.* Housing projects eligible for Agency RA include the following types of projects. ( 1 ) Housing projects that operate under an Interest Credit Plan II RA agreement.
( 2 ) Housing projects financed with an Agency off-farm labor housing loan or grant. On-farm labor housing is not eligible for rental assistance.
( 3 ) Housing projects financed with a direct or insured Rural Rental Housing loan approved prior to August 1, 1968, and operated under an interest credit agreement that identifies the housing project as a Plan RA project.
( 4 ) Housing projects financed from Agency and other sources if the conditions of § 3560.66 are met.
( b ) *Eligible units.* Borrowers may not request RA for rental units that the Agency determines are not habitable in accordance with § 3560.103.
( c ) *Eligible households.* Households eligible for rental assistance are those: ( 1 ) With very low- or low-incomes who are eligible to live in MFH;
( 2 ) Whose net tenant contribution to rent determined in accordance with § 3560.203(a)(1) is less than the basic rent for the unit;
( 3 ) Whose head of the household is a U.S. citizen or a legal alien as defined in § 3560.11;
( 4 ) Who meet the occupancy rules/policies established by the borrower in accordance with § 3560.155(e);
( 5 ) Who have a signed, unexpired tenant certification form on file with the borrower; and
( 6 ) Who is not delinquent on any Agency unauthorized assistance repayment agreements.
[69 FR 69106, Nov. 26, 2004, as amended at 87 FR 11283, Mar. 1, 2022] Effective Date Note
Effective Date Note: At 70 FR 8503, Feb. 22, 2005, in § 3560.254(c)(3), implementation of the words “Whose head of the household is a U.S. citizen or a legal alien as defined in § 3560.11.” was delayed indefinitely.
#### § 3565.152 Control of land.

At time of application, the lender must have evidence of site control by the borrower (option to purchase, lease, deed or other evidence acceptable to the Agency). At the time of loan closing, the lender's closing docket must provide documentary evidence that the borrower owns or has a long-term lease on the land on which the housing is or will be located. The form of ownership or the leasehold agreement must meet Agency requirements. Notwithstanding any investment in the site, the site may not be accepted based on the Agency's environmental assessment.
§ 3560.208 Rents during eviction or failure to recertify. ( a ) *Rents during eviction.* If a tenant is appealing an eviction and the borrower refuses to accept rent payment during the appeal of the eviction, the tenant must escrow required rent payments to safeguard their occupancy, unless State or local laws specify otherwise.
( b ) *Rents when tenants fail to recertify.* If a borrower can document that a tenant received a notice specifying a tenant recertification date and the tenant fails to comply by the specified date or fails to cooperate with verification or other procedures related to the tenant's recertification so that the tenant recertification cannot be completed by the recertification date, the borrower, within 10 days of the recertification date, shall give the tenant and the Agency written notification that: ( 1 ) Termination proceedings are being initiated, in accordance with § 3560.159; and
( 2 ) The tenant will be charged note rent until the tenant's lease is terminated.
( c ) *Unauthorized assistance due to tenant recertification failure.* Any unauthorized assistance received because of the tenant's failure to be recertified will be collected in accordance with the provisions of subpart O of this part.
( d ) *Rents when borrowers fail to recertify tenants.* If a borrower cannot document that a tenant received a recertification notice, and a tenant is not recertified within 12 months of the most recently executed tenant certification, tenants shall continue to make net tenant contributions to rent based on their most recent tenant certification and the borrower must remit to the Agency full overage as if the tenant was paying the note rent until the tenant is recertified.
( e ) *Unauthorized assistance due to borrower recertification failure.* Any unauthorized assistance received as a result of the borrower's failure to recertify a tenant will be collected from the borrower in accordance with the provisions of subpart O of this part and may not be paid from housing project funds or funds collected from the tenant.
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-KSB for the period ended February 28, 2006,
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 22, 2006          By: /s/ Greg Amato
                                  Greg Amato, Chief Executive
                                  Officer (Principal Executive
                                  Officer)



Dated:  May 22, 2006          By: /s/ James Ivchenko
                                  James Ivchenko,
                                  President (Principal Financial
                                  Officer)
#### The State of Ohio, Appellee, *v.*Sprafka, Appellant.

[Cite as *State v. Sprafka*(1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 168.]

(No. 98-1028

Submitted August 19, 1998

Decided September 23, 1998.)

*Charles E. Coulson,*Lake County Prosecuting Attorney, and *Julie Mitrovich King,*Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

*R. Paul LaPlante,*Lake County Public Defender, and *Vanessa Mac Knight,*Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed on the authority of *State v. Rush*(1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 53, 697 N.E.2d 634.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 23

                  Consent of Independent Public Accountants


      As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the
incorporation by reference of our reports dated May 12, 1998, included in or
incorporated by reference into Thermo TerraTech Inc.'s Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended April 4, 1998, and into the Company's previously
filed Registration Statements as follows:  Registration Statement No.
333-02269 on Form S-2, Registration Statement No. 33-16462 on Form S-8,
Registration Statement No. 33-16464 on Form S-8, Registration Statement No.
33-16465 on Form S-8, Registration Statement No. 33-16466 on Form S-8,
Registration Statement No. 333-2055 on Form S-3, Registration Statement No.
33-52824 on Form S-8, Registration Statement No. 033-65307 on Form S-8,
Registration Statement No. 033-65283 on Form S-8, Registration Statement No.
033-65281 on Form S-8, Registration Statement No. 33-86194 on Form S-8, and
Registration Statement No. 333-05263 on Form S-3.



                                             Arthur Andersen LLP



Boston, Massachusetts
June 26, 1998
#### § 3430.500 Applicability of regulations.

The regulations in this subpart apply to the program authorized under section 406 of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998 (AREERA), 7 U.S.C. 7626, as amended by the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (FCEA), Public Law 110-246.
<PAGE>

Common Stock Information
UNITED ASSET MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
 
    The Company's common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange.
Presented below are the high, low and closing quarterly stock prices for 1995
and 1996, as reported on the New York Stock Exchange composite tape, together
with quarterly dividends declared. This information has been restated for the
two-for-one common stock split effective June 7, 1996.
 
Ticker Symbol: UAM
 
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                         DIVIDEND
                                                                      HIGH         LOW         CLOSE      DECLARED
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

<S>                                                                <C>          <C>         <C>          <C>
First Quarter, 1995                                                $  19-11/16  $   17-1/2  $   19-3/16   $     .14
Second Quarter, 1995                                               $   20-9/16  $   17-3/8  $  17-13/16   $     .14
Third Quarter, 1995                                                $    20-3/4  $  17-9/16  $   20-1/16   $     .15
Fourth Quarter, 1995                                               $   20-3/16  $   17-7/8  $   19-3/16   $     .15
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First Quarter, 1996                                                $   23-5/16  $  18-3/16  $   23-3/16   $     .16
Second Quarter, 1996                                               $    25-1/8  $   21-3/4  $    24-1/2   $     .16
Third Quarter, 1996                                                $    25-1/8  $   21-3/4  $    23-5/8   $     .17
Fourth Quarter, 1996                                               $    27-5/8  $   23-1/4  $    26-5/8   $     .17
</TABLE>

                                  72
#### In the Matter of Harry L. Brown, an Attorney.

— Order of suspension entered. Present — Dillon, P. Defendant. Cardamone, Simons, Hancock, Jr., and Callahan, JJ. (Order entered Nov. 29,1979.)
March 28, 2015

Ms. Nia Daniels Program Anal ys t Airmen & Airspace Rules Division Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Ave. S.W. Washington, DC 20591
Dear Ms. Daniels: Thank y ou for y ou correspondence regarding m y request: Public doc ket No. FAA - 2015 - 00439. Ihave responded with the requested information and am asking that you proceed with my request for exemption. The additional information requested is provided on the following pages. Please feel free to contact me at 530 - 448 - 6 105 should y ou require an ything else to proceed. Sincerel y,

Steven R Mitchell eMedia Films

– Lak e Tahoe Steve Mitchell

– eMedia Films

– Lak e Tahoe Public Docket No. FAA - 2015 - 0439Public Docket No. FAA - 2015 - 0439

Regarding your request for additi onal information: **Why would this request be in the public interest, and how would it benefit the public as a whole:**  1) Granting this exemption would allow a qualified, experienced, and safet y minded operator ( eMedia Films ) to provide a valued & needed se rvice to the Reno / Tahoe community . 2) This valued service would be more affordable and far more safe than filming from a manned aircraft. Furthermore: As a matter of good public relations we will be working with the various local chambers of commerce and Visitors Authorities, and schools to educate the general public about UAS safet y and operations. We would also be working with the various local chambers of commerce and Visitors Authorities to educate the general public domestically and internationall y t o the beaut y of the region and the environmental issues facing Nevada, California and specifically L ake Tahoe. Future plans include adding digital 3D mapping, and making these services available to Universities and other research entities. **Your request f**

**or additional information, views, or arguments to support the request:**  1) Alread y Provided “ Steve Mitchell

– eMedia Films: UAS 34 point Pre -Flight Check List.” - Provided with the original exemption request. ( also enclosed) 2) Alread y Provided “ Steve Mitchell

– eMedia Films: Flight Procedures & Rules” - Provided with the original exemption request. ( also enclosed) 3) DVD: Real Estate video example. This example shows what kind of UAS flying would t ypicall y be involved in this ty pe of operation. The example is also online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocZEDe6xSTk Please note: The online version is better video quality than the DVD. 4) In closing: I would just like to state that was v ery pleased to hear the FAA announcement that it recognizes the need for safe, legal commercial UAS operations in the U.S. and want to be a part of this important movement. Thank y ou for y our consideration of this request. Steve Mitchell

– eMedia Films

– Lak e Tahoe
# 7.304 [Reserved]

**Parent topic:**Subpart 7.3 - Contractor Versus Government Performance
---

Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Fox
Petroleum Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended August 31, 2008 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
the undersigned, Richard Moore, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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.

October 20, 2008

*/s/ Richard
Moore*Richard MoorePresident, Chief Executive Officer,
Chairman, and Director (Principal Executive 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 the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

---
<PAGE>   1
Exhibit 23.1




                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-3 (No. 333-58635, No. 333-43423 and No. 333-45913)and in
the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-10487, No. 333-91551, No. 333-
82025, No. 333-82023 and No. 333-81977) of Metal Management, Inc. of our report
dated June 5, 2000, relating to the financial statements and financial statement
schedule, which appear in this Form 10-K.




PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Chicago, Illinois
June 6, 2000
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2576 

To amend title 49, United States Code, to modify requirements relating 

to the availability of pipeline safety regulatory documents, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 28, 2013 

Mr. DENHAM (for himself, Ms. BROWN of Florida, Mr. SHUSTER, and Mr. 

RAHALL) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions 

as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To amend title 49, United States Code, to modify requirements relating to the availability of pipeline safety regulatory documents, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. AVAILABILITY OF PIPELINE SAFETY REGU4 LATORY DOCUMENTS. 

5 Section 60102(p) of title 49, United States Code, is 

6 amended— 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2576 IH

1 (1) by striking ‘‘1 year’’ and inserting ‘‘3 

2 years’’; 

3 (2) by striking ‘‘guidance or’’; and 

4 (3) by striking ‘‘, on an Internet Web site’’. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

March 7, 2019

No. 04

- 17

- 00815

- CR

Issac WILLIAMS

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 187th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014CR8370B

Honorable Joey Contreras, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

The State ’ s motion for leave to file a post

- submission supplemental brief is GRANTED.

The State ’ s brief was filed March 1, 2019.

It is so ORDERED on March 7, 2019

.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO: _________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
97-1294.

#### Tongren v. Pub. Util. Comm.

Public Utilities Commission, No. 96-219-GA-GCR. On motion for leave to intervene of East Ohio Gas Company, motion to consolidate for oral argument with 97-740, *supra,*and motion to extend time for oral argument. Motions granted and each side shall have twenty minutes.

Douglas, J., would grant the motion for leave to intervene but deny the motions to consolidate and to extend time.

Cook, J., not participating.
#### Richard W. Baron, Appellant, v. Pamela S. Baron, Respondent.

Order, entered on June 10, 1966, granting defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint in this action to rescind a separation agreement and declare the nullity of a Mexican divorce, and granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment on her first counterclaim, unanimously affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements to the respondent. A prior motion to dismiss the same complaint in this action had been denied by Mr. Justice Aurelio on June 23, 1965. The motion resulting in this appeal was made about nine months later. It attacked the identical complaint involved in the prior motion and it was made on basically the same grounds and the same facts as the earlier motion. The later motion should have been transferred, in accordance with settled practice, to the Justice of co-ordinate jurisdiction whose order was sought to be changed. (CPLR 2221.) While the failure to comply with this practice does not warrant reversal, we do wish to express our disapproval for the failure of the court below to comply with the settled practice. Concur — Stevens, J. P., Capozzoli, Tilzer and Rabin, JJ.
#### § 29.1047 Package.

A hogshead, tierce, case, bale, or other securely enclosed parcel or bundle.

[42 FR 21092, Apr. 25, 1977. Redesignated at 47 FR 51721, Nov. 17, 1982, 48 FR 29671, June 28, 1983, 49 FR 16756, Apr. 20, 1984, and 51 FR 25027, July 10, 1986]