alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 3201.13 Diesel fuel additives. ( a ) *Definition.* ( 1 ) Any substance, other than one composed solely of carbon and/or hydrogen, that is intentionally added to diesel fuel (including any added to a motor vehicle's fuel system) and that is not intentionally removed prior to sale or use.
( 2 ) Neat biodiesel, also referred to as B100, when used as an additive. Diesel fuel additive does not mean neat biodiesel when used as a fuel or blended biodiesel fuel (e.g., B20).
( b ) *Minimum biobased content.* The minimum biobased content is 90 percent and shall be based on the amount of qualifying biobased carbon in the product as a percent of the weight (mass) of the total organic carbon in the finished product.
( c ) *Preference effective date.* No later than March 16, 2007, procuring agencies, in accordance with this part, will give a procurement preference for qualifying biobased diesel fuel additives. By that date, Federal agencies that have the responsibility for drafting or reviewing specifications for items to be procured shall ensure that the relevant specifications require the use of biobased diesel fuel additives.
[71 FR 13705, Mar. 16, 2006, as amended at 73 FR 27953, May 14, 2008]
#### In the Matter of City of Long Beach, Respondent, v Civil Service Employees Association, Inc.—Long Beach Unit, Appellant.

[813 NYS2d 916]

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to stay two arbitrations, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Bucaria, J.), entered February 16, 2005, which, inter alia, granted the petition and stayed the arbitrations.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly, inter alia, stayed the arbitra*790tions. Because the provisions of the parties’ collective bargaining agreement upon which the appellant relies have the effect of limiting the petitioner’s ability to discharge provisional employees, those provisions are against public policy and unenforceable as a matter of law *(see*Civil Service Law § 65 [2]; *Matter of United Fedn. of Teachers, Local 2, AFT, AFL-CIO v Board of Educ. of City School Dist. of City of N.Y.,*1 NY3d 72, 78-81 [2003]; *Matter of Preddice v Callanan,*69 NY2d 812 [1987]; *Edelman v Israel,*208 AD2d 1104 [1994]; *Matter of Hartley v Human Resources Admin. of City of N.Y.,*132 AD2d 699 [1987]; *Matter of City of Binghamton [Binghamton Civ. Serv. Forum],*63 AD2d 790 [1978]; *see generally Matter of Buffalo Police Benevolent Assn. [City of Buffalo],*4 NY3d 660 [2005]). Prudenti, P.J., Santucci, Krausman and Dillon, JJ., concur.
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 50374 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
CLAUDIO MARQUEZ MARTINEZ , JR.,

Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 4:14

- CR

- 629

- 2

Before J OLLY, PRADO, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judge s. PER CURIAM: *
The attorney appointed to represent Claudio Marquez Martinez, Jr., has
moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Martinez has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Martinez ’s claim of
ine ffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claim

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED February 21, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 16-50374 Document: 00513883100 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/21/2017No. 16

- 50374

2 without prejudice to collateral review. See United States v. Isgar , 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014 )

. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Martinez ’s response. We concur with counsel’s

asse ssment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See
5 TH C IR

. R . 42.2. Case: 16-50374 Document: 00513883100 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/21/2017
#### § 29.128 For certificates.

A charge may be made, in the discretion of the Director, for copies of certificates other than those required to be distributed in § 29.67, and for the issuance of a duplicate certificate in accordance with § 29.108.
#### In the Matter of Rose Berman, Appellant, v. George James, as Commissioner of the Department of Health of the City of New York and Chairman of the Board of Health of the City of New York, et al., Respondents.

Judgment dismissing the petition unanimously reversed on the consent of the respondent, without costs or disbursements to either party, the petition is reinstated and the matter remanded for determination by Special Term. The original declaration by Special Term should not have been made in view of its dismissal of the petition for lack of standing of the petitioner to maintain the declaratory judgment action. Accordingly, this petition should not have been dismissed. Concur — Botein, P. J., Stevens, Tilzer and Rabin, JJ.
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

ex rel. RAYME M. EDLER, M.D.,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 3:20cv5503-MCR-HTC

ESCAMBIA COUNTY,

Defendant.

_________________________________/

ORDER

The parties have filed a Joint Motion to Stay Litigation Pending Mediation, 

ECF No. 166, requesting the Court stay all proceedings through April 10, 2024, to 

allow the parties to submit to mediation. On consideration, the Court finds, and the 

parties agree, that the interests of efficiency and judicial economy are best served by 

staying this matter, including all discovery and proceedings, for the reasons set forth 

in the parties’ joint motion. Additionally, the Court finds it would be beneficial to 

require the parties to participate in a settlement conference with the assigned United 

States Magistrate Judge to further explore an amicable resolution.

Accordingly,

Case 3:20-cv-05503-MCR-HTC Document 167 Filed 02/02/24 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

1. This case is STAYED by consent of the parties until April 10, 2024.

The parties must file a status report no later than February 26, 2024, informing the 

Court of the scheduled mediation date.

2. The case is hereby referred to Magistrate Judge Hope T. Cannon 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) for a settlement conference to be conducted no later 

than March 29, 2024. See also N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 72.3. The Clerk is directed to refer 

the case to the undersigned when the Magistrate Judge files a report of the results of 

that conference.

3. The parties must notify the Court no later than April 10, 2024, whether

the case settles or is ready to proceed.

DONE AND ORDERED this 2nd day of February 2024.

 M. Casey Rodgers M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:20-cv-05503-MCR-HTC Document 167 Filed 02/02/24 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT
32.2





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 on Form 10-K of Arrow Resources Development,
Inc. (the Company ) for the year ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report ), I, Peter J.
Frugone, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that,
subject to the disclosure of deficiencies in the Company ’ s disclosure controls
and procedures set forth in Item 8A of the Report:





(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.




April 15,
2009





/s/ Peter
      J. FrugonePeter
      J. FrugoneChief
      Financial Officer
### Geology, hydrology, and water quality in the vicinity of a Brownfield redevelopment site in East Moline, Illinois

By: Robert T. Kay**

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr00400

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- NGMDB Index Page:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**                            (html)
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

#### Study Area

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
P.O. BOX 1059 • 505 WEST C• McCook, NE 69001·1059 • PHONE (308) 345-2022 • FAX (308) 345-1461

March 3, 2014

Kevin Schlemmer Chief, Essential Air Service & DomesticAnalysis Division United States Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJerseyAve SE Washington, DC 20590 Re: McCook Ben Nelson Regional Airport Preferred Air Carrier and Priority Preference ofAir Service Routes Dear Mr. Schlemmer: By unanimous vote, the McCook City Council took the following action in response to your e-mail dated February 3, 2014 atthe February 17, 2014 City Council Meeting: 1. Recommend to the Department ofTransportation to acceptthe proposal from Great Lakes Aviation to continue 12 nonstop round trips perweek to Denver International Airport. The City Council also wanted to forward to you the following concerns that have been raised concerning Great Lakes Aviation: -With the number ofcancelled flights, there will need to be a substantial amount of

additional marketing by Great Lakes in orderto build confidence once again in their operation. -Great Lakes has in place an aggressive training program for pilots. This commitmentwill

need to be followed thru with in orderto increase the number ofpilots available so that they can provide consistent and reliable service to the markets thatthey serve. Thankyou for this opportunity to submitthis information foryour consideration. Cordially,

# 1/t~ Kyle Potthoff Public Works Director/Asst. Airport Manager City of McCook
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D18-2680

_____________________________

CURTIS BROWN,

Petitioner,

v.

JULIE L. JONES, Secretary, 

Florida Department of 

Corrections,

Respondent.

_____________________________

Petition for Writ of Mandamus—Original Jurisdiction.

August 8, 2018

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of mandamus is denied on the merits.

MAKAR, OSTERHAUS, and WINSOR, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Curtis Brown, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee; Kenneth S. 

Steely, General Counsel, Department of Corrections, Tallahassee,

for Respondent.
Fox Petroleum Inc. 10-Q






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, 2011, 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 12, 2011
 
 /s/   "William Lieberman"William 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.
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________ 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney,

whose name and address are:

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

Date:

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

 Northern District of Florida

LEDAWN GIBSON FLORIDA A&M UNIVERSITY BOARD OF TRUSTEES

FLORIDA A&M UNIVERSITY BOARD OF TRUSTEES

c/o OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL

1700 LEE HALL DRIVE

SUITE 304-SHAC

TALLAHASSES, FL 32307

 CARLOS J. BURRUEZO, ESQ. 

 BERTHA L. BURRUEZO, ESQ.

 BURRUEZO & BURRUEZO, PLLC

 911 OUTER LANE ROAD

 ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32814

10/15/2019

4:19-cv-00512-MW-CAS

s/Ronnell Barker, Deputy Clerk 

Case 4:19-cv-00512-MW-MAF Document 4 Filed 10/16/19 Page 1 of 2
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .

’ I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or

’ I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or

’ I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

 designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or

’ I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

’ Other (specify):

.

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:

Server’s signature

Printed name and title

Server’s address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

0.00

Case 4:19-cv-00512-MW-MAF Document 4 Filed 10/16/19 Page 2 of 2
Ruben Garza, Jr.Appellee



# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

March 10, 2014

N o. 04

- 13

- 00331

- CR

The STATE of Texas,

Appellant

v.

Rube n GARZA , Jr.,

Appellee

From the 49th Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2011CRJ000782

- D1

Honorable Jose A. Lopez, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

The Appellee ’ s motion for extension of time to file the brief is GRANTED IN PART

. Time is extended to April 9, 2014. No further extensions will be granted.

_________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 10th day of March, 2014

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
N OTE : This o rder is nonprecedential.



# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

NATHANIEL JAMES,
Claimant

- Appellant,

v.

ERIC K. SHINSEKI, SECRETARY OF VETERAN S AFFAIRS, Respondent

- Appellee.

______________________

2013

- 7147

______________________

Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for
Veterans Claims in No. 12

- 1574, Judge Alan G. Lance, Sr.

______________________

ON MOTION

______________________

Before M OORE , L INN and O’M ALLEY

, Circuit Judges.

L INN

, C ircuit Judge.

O R D E R

Nathaniel James appeals from a decision of the Uni ted States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (“Vete rans Court”) denying his entitlement to an increased disability rating. The Secretary of Veterans Affairs (“Secretary”) moves without opposition to remand the case Case: 13-7147 Document: 13 Page: 1 Filed: 12/20/2013JAMES v. SHINSEKI 2

f

or additional proceedings consistent with Nat’l Org. of Veterans’ Advocates, Inc. v. Sec’y of Veterans Affairs , 7 2 5 F.3d 1312 (Fed. Cir. 2013) (“ NOVA ”)

.
In NOVA , this court approved a remedial plan offered by the Secretary to correct the application of an invalid rule eliminating veterans’ procedural due process and appellate rights provided under 38 C.F.R. § 3.103 (c)(2)

. As part of that plan, the S ecretary agreed to identify and
offer to remand cases affected by the inva lid rule , such as
the instant appeal, for purposes of providing claimants with a new hearing and an opportunity to submit new evidence followed by a new decision. In accordance with
NOVA , this court grant s the Secretary’s unopposed m otion for remand. Upon remand from this court and then
from the Veterans Court to the Board of Veterans’ A ppeals (“Board”), t he Secretary will provide James with the requisite notice and available remedies provided in the approved remedial plan.

Accordingly,

I T I S O RDERED T HAT :

(1) The m otion is granted. The case is remanded to
the Veterans Court with direction to remand the case to the Board for additional proceedings consistent with
NOVA and this order.

(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.

F OR THE C OURT

/s/ Daniel E. O’Toole
Daniel E. O’Toole
Clerk of Court

s26

ISSUED AS MANDATE: December 20, 2013 Case: 13-7147 Document: 13 Page: 2 Filed: 12/20/2013
-       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2023-07-14T20:13:08-0400
      - Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20401
      - Government Publishing Office
      - Government Publishing Office attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by Government Publishing Office
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Mario Arena, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered February 22, 1979, convicting him of four counts of grand larceny in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of imprisonment, all with a maximum of three years, in addition to fines totaling $28,000. Judgment modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by vacating the sentence of imprisonment and substituting therefor provisions sentencing defendant on all counts, in addition to the fines, to concurrent terms of 60 days’ imprisonment and 4 years and 10 months’ probation. As so modified, judgment affirmed, and case remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, to fix the conditions of probation and for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (subd 5). The sentence was excessive to the extent indicated herein. Titone, J. P., O’Connor, Gulotta and Margett, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Reportof Linn Energy, LLC (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the threemonths ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Kolja Rockov, Executive VicePresident and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

2.                                       Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| Date: May 14, 2007 | By:    | /s/ Kolja Rockov                                     |   |
|-------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                    |   | Kolja Rockov                                         |
|                    |   | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
# L_2020439EN.01003201.xml

| 29.12.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 439/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.12.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 439/32

---

Corrigendum to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/1794 of 16 September 2020 amending Part I of Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2018/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the use of in-conversion and non-organic plant reproductive material

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 402 of 1 December 2020
  )

On page 24, in the second paragraph of Article 2:

for:

‘
  1 January 2021
  ’,

read:

‘
  1 January 2022
  ’.

---
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2613 

To amend the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 

to provide the President with the authority to exempt civilian Department 

of Defense personnel accounts from sequestration. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 8, 2013 

Mr. BARROW of Georgia introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on the Budget 

A BILL 

To amend the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 to provide the President with the authority to exempt civilian Department of Defense personnel accounts from sequestration. 

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

3 SECTION 1. OPTIONAL EXEMPTION OF CIVILIAN DEPART4 MENT OF DEFENSE PERSONNEL. 

5 Section 255(f) of the Balanced Budget and Emer6 gency Deficit Control Act of 1985 is amended— 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2613 IH

1 (1) in the side heading by inserting before the 

2 period at the end ‘‘AND CIVILIAN DEPARTMENT OF

3 DEFENSE PERSONNEL’’; and 

4 (2) in paragraph (1) by inserting ‘‘and any ci5 vilian Department of Defense personnel account’’ 

6 after ‘‘miltary personnel account’’. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### § 330.103 Documentation.

Any notifications, reports, and similar documentation not specified in the regulations in this part, but necessary to carry out the purpose of the regulations, will be prescribed in administrative instructions.