alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
 

REGION 8
 

1595 Wynkoop Street 

DENVER, CO 80202-1129 

Phone 800-227-8917 

http://www.epa.gov/region08 

~. .~"~.:~)~ r~l, 0 i")r)A1 

: ;. \." .;. '.i b' Ld l , 

Ref: 8P-AR 

Mr. Wayne Stenehjem 

North Dakota Attorney General 

Office of Attorney General 

600 E. Boulevard Ave. Dept. 125 

SWtc of North Dakota 

Bismarck. North Dakota 58505 

Re: Your Request for Extension of Comment Period re North Dakota Regional Haze State 

Implementation Plan and federal Implementation Plan for Interstate Transport of Pollution 

Affecting Visibility and Regional Haze (Proposed Action) 

Dear Mr. Stenehjem: 

Thank you for your lettcr of October 25. 2011. requesting a 30-day cxtension to the public 

comment period f()r the U.S. Environmcntal Protection Agency's (EPA) proposed action 

referenced above. We have thoroughly considered your request and we are unable to grant it. 

The deadline for submitting writtcn comments remains November 21. 2011. 

Based on the scope of our proposed action. we consider the current 60-day comment period to be 

reasonable for the following reasons. first. we have provided for a 60-day comment period. 

which is double the length of the 30-day comment period the EPA typically provides on state 

implementation plan actions. In addition. while the 60 days runs from publication. we posted our 

proposed action on our website and notified North Dakota ot1icials of its availability on our 

website the day it was signed and 20 days bef()re it \vas published in the Federal Register. At the 

Governor's and your request. we also extended our public hearing in Bismarck from /()ur hours 

to 14 hours over two consecutive days. 

Finally. we are subject to two separate consent decree deadlines that require the EPA's action by 

January 26. 20]2 and February 9. 20]2. respectively. Ifwe were to extend the November 21. 

20] I deadline. we would leave ourselves with insufficient time to consider and respond to all 

public comments. including those from the state of North Dakota. As it is. we will be facing a 

considerable challenge to meet these deadlines. 
Ill'	 you I ' 1<lVC yucstlOns conccrnmg . our pu bl' Ie comment process, p I ease contact me. or your stal .­j 

may wish to contact Carl Daly. our Air Program Director at 0(3) 312-64 I(1. or Jonah Staller. in 

lour ()jlicc or Re~ional Counsel at (303) 312-6855. 

Sincerely. 

~James B. Martin 

Regional Administrator ..

cc:	 David Olatt (Environmental Director. NDDI!) 

Terry O'Clair (Director. ND DAQ) 

2
CERTIFICATIONS
                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.1

I, Luiz Augusto Brasil, Chief Executive Officer, certify that:

     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of NITAR TECH CORP.

     2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;

     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

     4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have;

     Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

     Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

     Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by this
quarterly report (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and

     5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

     All significant deficiencies and material weakness in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

     Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.


     Date: February 26, 2007         /S/ LUIZ AUGUSTO BRASIL
                                     -------------------------------
                                      Luiz Augusto Brasil
                                      Chief Executive Officer
#### Mildred Farnorotto, Appellant, v. Fritz Rosenthal, Respondent.

Memorandum by the Court. Plaintiff in a negligence action recovered $5,500 for her pain and suffering, some slight disfigurement resulting from a forehead laceration not well depicted by the record and relatively minor loss of flexion and extension following a condylar fracture of the humerus requiring three weeks’ hospitalization for traction. Plaintiff appeals on the ground of inadequacy. While the proof would doubtless have warranted a substantially larger verdict, the award was not so low as to be shocking and we cannot, upon this record, disturb the jury’s evaluation of the injuries. Judgment and order affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Staley, Jr., and Brink, JJ., concur.
#### § 3430.709 Duration of awards.

The term of a Federal assistance award made for a BRDI project shall not exceed 5 years. No-cost extensions of time beyond the maximum award terms will not be considered or granted.
98-1000.

#### State Dept. of Taxation v. Cohen.

Cuyahoga App. No. 73705. Reported at 83 Ohio St.3d 1415, 698 N.E.2d 1005. On motion for reconsideration. Motion denied.
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002

I, Anthony Kai Yiu Lo, Co-Chief Executive Officer and principal financial officer of Shanghai Century Acquisition Corporation (the
Company), do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



| |  |  | the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarters ended September 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | - |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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

Date: November 13, 2006



|                                              
|----------------------------------------------
|/s/ Anthony Kai Yiu Lo                        
|Anthony Kai Yiu Lo Principal financial
officer



23
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Troy Jackson, Appellant.

[814 NYS2d 623]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bruce Allen, J.), rendered November 25, 2003, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of sexual abuse in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of seven years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s determinations concerning credibility *(see People v Gaimari,*176 NY 84, 94 [1903]). The fact that the jury reached a mixed verdict, acquitting defendant of rape in the first degree, does not warrant a different conclusion *(see People v Rayam,*94 NY2d 557 [2000]).

The court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant’s mistrial motion based on the prosecutor’s summation. The challenged portions of the summation did not shift the burden of proof or deprive defendant of a fair trial. Although the summation contained occasional improprieties, they were not so egregious as to warrant reversal *(see People v D'Alessandro,*184 AD2d 114, 118-119 [1992], *lv denied*81 NY2d 884 [1993]). Furthermore, we note that defendant made almost all of his objections after the summation was completed *(see People v Ortiz,*54 NY2d 288, 292 n 3 [1981]; *see also People v Narayan,*54 NY2d 106, 114 [1981]).

We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining claims. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Mazzarelli, Friedman, Sweeny and McGuire, JJ.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32 Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 The undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the annual
period ended December 31, 2004 of Naturade, Inc. (the Company) 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 such periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented
in such report. /s/ Bill D. StewartBill D. StewartChief Executive OfficerMarch 31, 2005/s/ Stephen M. KasprisinStephen M. KasprisinChief Financial OfficerMarch 31, 2005
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the
Company and it will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff on request.
§ 319.8-11 From approved areas of Mexico. ( a ) Entry of lint, linters, and waste (including gin and oil mill wastes) which were derived from cotton grown in, and which were produced and handled only in approved areas of Mexico[3] may be authorized through Mexican Border ports in Texas named in the permits ( 1 ) For movement into the generally infested pink bollworm regulated area such products becoming subject immediately upon release by the inspector to the requirements, in § 301.52 of this chapter, applicable to like products originating in the pink bollworm regulated area, or
( 2 ) For movement to an approved mill or plant for utilization, or
( 3 ) For movement to New Orleans for immediate vacuum fumigation.
( b ) Entry of cottonseed or cottonseed hulls in bulk, or in covers that are new or which have not been used previously to contain cotton or unmanufactured cotton products, may be authorized through Mexican Border ports in Texas named in the permits, for movement into the generally infested pink bollworm regulated area when certified by an inspector as having been produced in an approved area and handled subsequently in a manner satisfactory to the inspector. Upon arrival in the generally infested pink bollworm regulated area such cottonseed or cottonseed hulls will be released from further plant quarantine entry requirements and shall become subject immediately to the requirements in § 301.52 of this chapter.
[27 FR 5309, June 7, 1962, as amended at 63 FR 31101, June 8, 1998; 78 FR 25570, May 2, 2013; 79 FR 19810, Apr. 10, 2014] Footnotes -
319.8-11
[3] See § 319.8-1(p) for definition of “Approved areas of Mexico.” These are within that part of Mexico not included in the “West Coast of Mexico” (§ 319.8-1(q)) or “Northwest Mexico” (§ 319.8-1(r)).
EXHIBIT 32

In connection with the quarterly report of Holloman Energy Corporation, (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) Mark Stevenson, the Principal Executive Officer of the Company and Robert Wesolek, the Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of their knowledge:

(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.



|             |     |                                            
|------------ | --- | -------------------------------------------
|             |     |                                            
|May 17, 2010 | By: | /s/MARK STEVENSON                          
|             |     | Mark Stevenson, Principal Executive Officer
|             |     |                                            
|             |     |                                            
|             |     |                                            
|             |     |                                            
|May 17, 2010 | By: | /s/ ROBERT WESOLEK                         
|             |     | Robert Wesolek, Principal Financial Officer
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 10, 2022

No. 04-22-00465-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF J.A.J., N.Z.J., AND N.V.J., Children

From the 150th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2021-PA-00188

Honorable Raul Perales, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

This is an accelerated appeal from an order terminating appellant’s parental rights. 

Appellee’s brief originally was due on October 10, 2022. On October 10, 2022, appellee filed a 

first request for an extension, asking for an additional twenty days in which to file the brief and 

stating “[a]ppellee will request no further extensions.” 

The Texas Rules of Judicial Administration require this court to “ensure that the appeal is 

brought to final disposition . . . [w]ithin 180 days of the date the notice of appeal is filed.” Tex. 

R. Jud. Adm. 6.2(a). This accelerated appeal has been pending since the notice of appeal was 

filed in the trial court on July 28, 2022. The request is GRANTED; however, given the 

constraints governing disposition of this appeal, no further extensions of time will be granted 

absent extenuating circumstances. Appellee is ORDERED to file its brief no later than 

October 31, 2022. 

It is so ORDERED on October 10, 2022.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO:__________________________

 MICHAEL A. CRUZ, 

 CLERK OF COURT

FILE COPY
#### Sani Distributors, Inc., Respondent, v. Toyoshima & Co., Inc., Appellant.

Order entered December 8, 1966 granting the application of respondent for a stay of an arbitration proceeding instituted by appellant reversed, on the law and on the facts, and stay vacated, with $30 costs and disbursements to appellant. Extensive correspondence between the parties, subsequent to the order contract of October 22, 1965 adequately confirms the existence of a contract and fulfillment of the alternative condition that the order *“*shall become a contract only when signed by Buyer and accepted in writing by Seller ”, *(Crabtree*v. *Elizabeth Arden Sales Corp.,*305 N. Y. 48, 55; *Matter of Wachusett Spinning Mills [Blue Bird Silk Mfg.*Co.], 7 A D 2d 382, affd. 6 N Y 2d 948.) Disputes as to interpretation of the agreement between the parties did ensue but they were all referable to the initial contract. In view of the sweeping language of the arbitration clause, these disputes must necessarily be transmitted to arbitration. *(Race Co.*v. *Oxford Hall Contr. Corp.,*25 A D 2d 665.) Concur — Botein, P. J., Steuer, Tilzer and McGivern, JJ.; Stevens, J., dissents in the following memorandum: I do not quarrel with the proposition that a contract need not be contained within a single executed document but may be pieced together out of separate connected writings (cf. *Matter of Wachusett Spinning Mills [Blue Bird Silk],*7 A D 382, affd. 6 N Y 2d 948). It is still requisite, however, that in order for a contract to come into being there must be some meeting of the minds or consensual agreement. The difficulty in the present ease is that these parties never seem to have agreed on exactly what was to be purchased or sold. The basic order contract No. M-2496 dated October 22, 1965, which contained the provision for arbitration, referred to goods of a particular quality or description. This document was never signed by respondent Sani as requested. Instead, Sani, by letter dated March 8, 1966, referred to and ordered an assortment with a different fabric construction, to which Toyoshima replied in effect, insisting upon the fabric construction contained in the October, 1965 document. There is further correspondence between the parties from which it might be inferred that some order was placed out of what fabric construction is not clear. Additionally, the document of October 22, 1965, expressly provided that the order should become a contract “ only when signed by the Buyer and accepted in writing by Seller, or when *921Buyer has accepted delivery of any part of the goods ”. Neither of the eventualities provided for occurred. The parties had both the right and power to limit the circumstances under which a contract should come into being. The parties should not be compelled to arbitrate unless it is clear that they have agreed to do so. Accordingly, I would affirm.
**EXHIBIT      32.1**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. SS.1350,**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|                                       |                                                 |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               |
|--------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                       | **IR                BIOSCIENCES HOLDINGS, INC.**     |
|                                  |                                            |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          |
| Date: October                10, 2007 | By:                                        |                                                                             |
|                                       | Michael                K. Wilhelm                    |
|                                       | President                and Chief Executive Officer |

----
**EXHIBIT32.2**

 

**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 theQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of 155 East Tropicana, LLC, a Nevadalimited-liability company and 155 East Tropicana Finance Corp., a Nevadacorporation (collectively, the “Company”) for the three months ended June 30,2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), Neil G. Kiefer, as President and Chief Executive Officer of theCompany, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

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

 

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

 

 
| /s/  Neil G. Kiefer                                              |   |
|------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Neil  G. Kiefer,   Chief Executive Officer  August 14, 2009 |   |

 

The foregoing certificationsare being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and are not being filedas part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

 

----
#### § 3560.554 Use of funds restrictions.

Off-farm labor housing loan and grant funds may not be used for any purpose prohibited by § 3560.54 except § 3560.54(a)(1). Off-farm labor housing may be used to serve migrant farmworkers.