alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Pedro Torres, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered April 14, 1976, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. We have reviewed the record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious grounds which could be raised on this appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw is granted (see *Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Pearson,*62 AD2d 1043; *People v Foster,*58 AD2d 814; cf. *People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Hopkins, J. P., Titone, Mangano and Rabin, JJ., concur.
Fox Petroleum 10-Q





Exhibit 32.1








CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








The undersigned, William Lieberman, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Fox Petroleum Inc. hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Fox Petroleum Inc. for the period ended May 31, 2010, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Fox Petroleum Inc.








Date: July 20, 2010





/s/   William LiebermanWilliam Lieberman

President, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Principal Accounting Officer, Treasurer





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signatures that appear in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Fox Petroleum Inc. and will be retained by Fox Petroleum Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 32.2



WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. 1350, I, the undersigned Principal Financial Officer of Enable IPC Corporation (the "Company"), hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended September 30, 2007 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated: November 9, 2007





/s/ Anna Rhee

Anna Rhee

Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
#### § 29.3037 Length.

The linear measurement of cured tobacco leaves from the butt of the midrib to the extreme tip. Length, as an element of quality, does not apply to tobacco in strip form. (See Elements of quality.)

[24 FR 8771, Oct. 29, 1959. Redesignated and amended at 49 FR 16757, 16758, Apr. 20, 1984]
Case 3:20-cr-00033-MCR Document 112 Filed 04/12/21 Page 1 of 7
Case 3:20-cr-00033-MCR Document 112 Filed 04/12/21 Page 2 of 7
Case 3:20-cr-00033-MCR Document 112 Filed 04/12/21 Page 3 of 7
Case 3:20-cr-00033-MCR Document 112 Filed 04/12/21 Page 4 of 7
Case 3:20-cr-00033-MCR Document 112 Filed 04/12/21 Page 5 of 7
Case 3:20-cr-00033-MCR Document 112 Filed 04/12/21 Page 6 of 7
Case 3:20-cr-00033-MCR Document 112 Filed 04/12/21 Page 7 of 7
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2554 

To increase water storage availability at the New Melones Reservoir to provide 

additional water for areas served below the reservoir, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 27, 2013 

Mr. DENHAM introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To increase water storage availability at the New Melones 

Reservoir to provide additional water for areas served 

below the reservoir, 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. WARREN ACT CONTRACT. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 30 days after the 

5 date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Interior 

6 shall develop and offer to the Oakdale Irrigation District 

7 and the South San Joaquin Irrigation District (hereafter 

8 in this section referred to as the ‘‘districts’’) a contract 

9 enabling the districts to collectively impound and store up 

10 to 100,000 acre-feet of their superior Stanislaus River 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2554 IH

1 water rights in the New Melones Reservoir in accordance 

2 with the terms and conditions of sections 1 through 3 of 

3 the Act of February 21, 1911 (43 U.S.C. 523–525; com4 monly known as the ‘‘Warren Act’’). 

5 (b) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—The terms and condi6 tions of any contract entered into under subsection (a) 

7 shall— 

8 (1) be for a term of not less than 10 years; and 

9 (2) expressly provide that— 

10 (A) the districts may use any water im11 pounded and stored in the New Melones Res12 ervoir for any legal purpose under California 

13 law, including use within the boundaries of ei14 ther district, transfer to and reasonable and 

15 beneficial use by a person or entity not located 

16 within the boundaries of either district, and for 

17 instream use in the Stanislaus River, the San 

18 Joaquin River, or the Sacramento-San Joaquin 

19 River Delta; and 

20 (B) any water impounded and stored by ei21 ther district shall not be released or withdrawn 

22 if the storage level of the New Melones Res23 ervoir is below 1,000,000 acre-feet, but in such 

24 event the impounded and stored water shall be 

25 retained in the New Melones Reservoir for use 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2554 IH

1 by the districts in the following year, subject to 

2 the same 1,000,000 acre-foot minimum storage 

3 requirement, and without additional payment 

4 being required. 

5 (c) CONSERVATION ACCOUNT.—Any water im6 pounded and stored in the New Melones Reservoir by ei7 ther district under the contract shall not be considered or 

8 accounted as water placed in the districts’ conservation 

9 account, as that account is defined and explained in the 

10 August 30, 1988 Stipulation and Agreement entered into 

11 by and between the Bureau of Reclamation and the dis12 tricts. 

Æ 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Amended and Restated Commitment Letter



 EXHIBIT 10.1 
 SEQUOIA ENTERPRISES, L.P. 
 VESSEL PARTNERS, L.P. 
 April 29, 2009 
 BDO Seidman, LLP 
 Ladies and gentlemen: 
 In connection with BDO Seidman, LLP’s audit of
the consolidated financial statements of Diedrich Coffee, Inc. (the “Company”) as of and for the year ended June 25, 2008, Sequoia Enterprises, L.P. (“Sequoia”) and Vessel Partners, L.P. (“Vessel” and collectively
with Sequoia, the “Lenders”) make the following commitments. This letter amends, restates and supersedes the Lenders’ letters to you dated as of October 8, 2008, November 10, 2008, January 23, 2009 and
March 27, 2009. 
  

	 	1.	The Lenders commit to provide additional financial support to the Company on commercially acceptable terms not to exceed $5 million (the “Commitment Cap”) until
April 8, 2010. Such amount will provide cash flow sufficient to operate the Company on a going concern basis during that period. 

  

	 	2.	To evidence the commitment in the paragraph above, the Lenders will enter into a commitment letter or note agreement not to exceed the Commitment Cap with the Company (the
“Company Agreement”) as soon as possible and no later than June 30, 2009. 

  

	 	3.	The Lenders will not require that the Company agree to any covenants more onerous than those presently existing in the agreements between the Company and Sequoia.


  

	 	4.	The Lenders have the intent and the ability to fully fund the financial commitments that are outlined in this letter. 

  

	 	5.	I have the authority as the General Partner of each of Sequoia Enterprises, L.P. and Vessel Partners, L.P. to make investment decisions and financial commitments outlined in this
letter. 

  

	 	6.	The Commitment Cap hereunder and under the Company Agreement shall automatically be reduced by the amount of gross proceeds from one or more transactions and by the amount of
availability under one or more credit or loan agreements with parties other than the Lenders. When the Commitment Cap is reduced to zero, the Lenders’ commitments set forth in this letter shall immediately cease and terminate.


  

	
	Sincerely,
	
	/s/ Paul Heeschen
	 Paul Heeschen
 General Partner, Sequoia Enterprises,
L.P.
 General Partner, Vessel Partners, L.P.
**Exhibit 23.1**
**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**
We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File Nos.333-83766 and 333-120422) and Form S-3 (File No. 333-117036) of EncoreAcquisition Company and in the related Prospectuses of our reports dated March 7, 2005, withrespect to the consolidated financial statements of Encore Acquisition Company, Encore AcquisitionCompany management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting,and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Encore Acquisition Company,included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.
/s/ Ernst & Young LLP
Fort Worth, Texas
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

v. CASE NO. 1:02-cr-00022-MP

JOHN GRISWOLD BRANDIES, JR,

Defendant.

___________________________/

O R D E R 

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 504, Motion for Early Termination of Probation,

filed by Mr. Brandies. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3564(c), the Court has considered the factors set

forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and determines that early termination is not warranted at this time. 

Accordingly, the motion is denied.

DONE AND ORDERED this 14th day of August, 2007

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case 1:02-cr-00022-MP Document 506 Filed 08/15/07 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. CASE NO. 4:02cr59-SPM

IRVENS PIERRE,

Defendant.

_____________________________/

ORDER RESCHEDULING SENTENCING

For good cause shown, the unopposed Motion to Reschedule Defendant’s

Sentencing (doc. 110), is granted. Sentencing is rescheduled for October 16,

2006 at 1:30 p.m. in Tallahassee, Florida. 

SO ORDERED this 12th day of September, 2006.

 s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

United States District Judge

Case 4:02-cr-00059-SPM-AK Document 112 Filed 09/12/06 Page 1 of 1
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh

Elizabeth M. Welch,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 March 30, 2021 t0322

Order 

Clerk

March 30, 2021

162545

JOHN O’BRIEN,

Plaintiff,

v SC: 162545

BOARD OF LAW EXAMINERS,

Defendant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the complaint for superintending control is considered, and 

relief is DENIED, because the Court is not persuaded that it should grant the requested 

relief.
# L_2021362EN.01000101.xml

| 12.10.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 362/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.10.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 362/1

---

COMMISSION DECISION (Euratom) 2021/1802

of 10 June 2021

pursuant to Article 83 of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community – A summary of the key provisions of the Decision are set out below, without prejudice to the full effect of the Decision itself

(notified under document number C(2021) 3889)

This Decision is addressed to the National Nuclear Research Centre (Instituto Superior Técnico, Campus Tecnológico e Nuclear – CTN, Portugal) and was notified to CTN on 10 June 2021.

Article 1

1.   National Nuclear Research Centre (Instituto Superior Técnico, Campus Tecnológico e Nuclear – CTN) has infringed the provisions contained in Article 78, first paragraph of the Euratom Treaty and in Article 3 and 4 of Commission Regulation (Euratom) No 302/2005 of 8 February 2005 on the application of Euratom safeguards (1) by not timely communicating to the Commission the correct and complete declaration of basic technical characteristics.

2.   National Nuclear Research Centre (Instituto Superior Técnico, Campus Tecnológico e Nuclear – CTN) has infringed the provisions contained in Article 79 of the Euratom Treaty and in Articles 7, 8 and 9 of Regulation (Euratom) No 302/2005 on the application of Euratom safeguards by the failure to set up and maintain a reliable accountancy system capable of reporting complete inventory of the nuclear materials.

Article 2

1.   The Commission issues a warning to National Nuclear Research Centre (Instituto Superior Técnico, Campus Tecnológico e Nuclear – CTN).

2.   The warning is imposed with the understanding that the shortcomings listed in Article 1 be rectified as soon as possible.

3.   Based on the report referred to in Article 3 and its own verifications, the Commission will assess CTN’s compliance with the requirements set out in paragraph 2.

Article 3

CTN shall provide the Commission, within 3 months of the date of this Decision, with a report describing the measures taken to rectify the failures listed in Article 1. CTN shall take measures to rule out similar occurrences in the future.

Article 4

1.   This Decision is addressed to the National Nuclear Research Centre (Instituto Superior Técnico, Campus Tecnológico e Nuclear – CTN, Portugal).

2.   This Decision shall be communicated to the Portuguese Republic.

Done at Brussels, 10 June 2021.

---

(1)  
  OJ L 5, 28.2.2005, p. 1.

1

---
Exhibit 10.33


 


	
  

  	
  Interoffice Memo

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  cc:

  	
  C.A.
  Rogerson

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  J. D. Hill

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Wilmington,
  Delaware

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  September 1,
  2004

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  



 


	
  TO:

  	
  John
  Televantos

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  FROM:

  	
  Ed
  Carrington

  



 


This is to confirm that the Compensation Committee of
the Hercules Board of Directors has approved the crediting of service to your
credited service “account” twenty-five years service representing your chemical
industry service prior to Hercules. This service is credited for purposes of
eligibility to receive benefits (but not the actual benefit calculation) under
the Hercules Pension Plan.


 


This service credit will also impact other benefit
eligibility such as the Long Term Incentive Plan vesting requirement which is
based upon achieving retirement status, e.g., Early Retirement, Reduced Early
Retirement or Normal Retirement eligibility.


 


Your official ASD-PE (Adjusted Service Date for
Pension Eligibility) will be changed to April 1977 immediately. Your official ASD-PC
(Pension Calculation) is unchanged at April 2002.
**Exhibit 32.2**

Certification of Principal Financial OfficerPursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Qfor the quarter ended March 31, 2006 (the “Report”) of Federal ServicesAcquisition Corporation (the “Registrant”), as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Peter M. Schulte, President andChief Financial Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify that:

(1) The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2) The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Registrant.

Date: May 12, 2006
|        | By:        | /s/    Peter  M. Schulte |
|--------|------------|----------------------------------------------|
|   | ** ** | **Peter  M. Schulte**                        |
|   | ** ** | **President  and Chief Financial Officer**   |
|   | ** ** | **(Principal  Financial Officer)**           |

 

 

----
#### § 29.2251 Definitions.

As used in these standards, the words and phrases hereinafter defined shall have the indicated meanings so assigned.
First Department,

February, 1967

(February 2, 1967)

#### In the Matter of Chateau Madrid Restaurant Corp., Petitioner, v. New York State Liquor Authority, Respondent.

Determination of respondent unanimously modified, on the facts and the law, by striking therefrom provisions with respect to charge No. 4, and otherwise confirmed, without costa and without disbursements. Charges Nos. 2 and 3 in this proceeding *by*the *709State Liquor Authority were supported by substantial evidence and should be confirmed *(Matter of Melon*v. *Epstein,*13 A D 2d 763). Charge No. 4 involved the giving of a name and address of a prostitute to a male customer by petitioner’s bartender. There is no substantial evidence that any similar conduct by this employee was tolerated by petitioner on any other occasion, or that petitioner was or should have been aware of what the bartender did. Nor was the conduct or management of the premises entrusted to this employee. Under these circumstances the proof cannot be said to constitute evidence that the petitioner suffered the premises to become disorderly hi respect thereto *(Matter of Migliaccio*v. *O’Connell,*307 N. Y. 566). As the period of suspension under this charge was directed to run concurrently with that under the charges sustained, no further change in the order is required. Concur—Steuer, J. P., Tilzer, Rabin and Witmer, JJ.
From: Jack Kennedy

Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 11:37 AM

To: Richard Hardegger

Cc: Lori L. Stegink

Subject: FW: Scrubber Cost Estimate

Rich:

Per our discussion this morning; here's the info I got on 90% SO2 control scrubbers for the taconite BART

Study.

Bottom line is that 90% is achievable in one scrubber, but it will need to be larger than standard venturi

rod scrubber to get the contact time needed for 90% control. I'll add and adjustment to our pelletizer

scrubber costs in the BACT report.

Jack___________________________________________

From: Jack Kennedy

Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 11:21 AM

To: Tony Shoberg; Teresa L. Kinder

Cc: Erik Boleman; Beth Havlik

Subject: Scrubber Cost Estimate

I talked to Hal Taylor, STS Consultants, and John Chitjian, Jardar Systems, regarding 90% SO2 control

from taconite furnaces. Both worked on the scrubber replacements at Minntac and Keetac.

To achieve 90% control, assume a second scrubber is needed with an equipment cost of $3.7M per

scrubber, including ancillary equipment. This cost is for a system rated at 500,000 acfm. It is based on

the scrubbers (2) installed at Keetac. Use the 0.6 exponent factor to adjust for other sizes. My notes
show Keetac at 850,000 acfm vs. scrubber design of 1,000,000 acfm. So, we should probably include

15% extra flow capacity for the other facilities when calculating the cost.

Additional notes:

1) Existing scrubbers do not have sufficient residence time, water flows and reagent concentrations

needed to achieve 90% control. Hal thought 90% could be achieved with system upgrades. John was

less optimistic about achieving 90%; so, we should add some caveats on setting permit limits as 90%

control efficiency

2) Per Hal at STS, it would be possible to achieve 90% control if an additional contact chamber is added.

This could be done by enlarging the existing scrubber or adding a second scrubber. Hal suggested a

horizontal spray scrubber with mist eliminators downstream of the existing venturi rod scrubbers. A

liquid/gas ratio of 40/1 is needed; so larger pumps and piping would be required. In addition, the lime

concentration in the scrubbing water needs to be increased. So, the lime slurry systems would need to

be upgraded. Hal suggested that the scrubber cost would represent 25% of the total cost needed for the

upgrade. The scrubber tower for a lime scrubbing system located at a green field site is 15% of total

equipment cost. Hal estimated the equipment cost of a second scrubber to be $800K - $900K. Use of the

0.6 exponent factor to estimate the cost of scrubbers rates at other flow rate would be an acceptable way

to estimate costs for the other taconite furnaces.

3) A second scrubber with mist eliminators would add 5' - 6' of pressure drop; so a blower upgrade would

be needed. The Keetac blowers were $290 each.

4) Total equipment cost based on information above is: $3.7MM = $850K/0.25 + $300K (for blower)

Jack Kennedy

Barr Engineering Co.

Phone 952-832-2913

Cell 612-310-5072

Email jkennedy@barr.com