alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 29.3075 Unstemmed.

A form of tobacco, including whole leaf and leaf scrap, from which the stems or midribs have not been removed.

[24 FR 8771, Oct. 29, 1959. Redesignated at 47 FR 51722, Nov. 17, 1982, 49 FR 16758, Apr. 20, 1984, and 51 FR 40407, Nov. 7, 1986]
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

JOANNE JENKINS and

QUENTON WOODEN,

Plaintiffs,

vs. CASE NO.: 4:03cv208-SPM/AK

OFFICER CHUCK PERRY,

Defendant.

_________________________/

ORDER REGARDING WITNESSES FOR TRIAL

At the pretrial conference on August 1, 2006, the parties addressed

certain objections to their respective witness lists. Plaintiffs had objections to

three defense witnesses: Cathy Williams, James Wooden, and Cathy Snapp.

With respect to Cathy Snapp, the Court granted Defendant’s request to

submit additional materials to support the admissibility of her testimony. The

materials are due on Friday, August 4, 2006. In the meantime, the Court will

keep this matter under advisement.

With respect to Cathy Williams and James Wooden, Plaintiffs object

because Defendant failed to previously disclose Cathy Williams and James

Wooden as potential witnesses. According to Defendant, the identity of these

witnesses were learned during Plaintiff Wooden’s deposition in October of 2005. 

Case 4:03-cv-00208-SPM-AK Document 172 Filed 08/02/06 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Defendant did not, however, make a supplemental disclosure as required under

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(e). Plaintiffs would be prejudiced if these

witnesses were permitted to testify because the discovery period has closed and

trial is just three weeks away. Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ objections to these

witnesses are sustained.

Plaintiffs advised that they will be making revisions to their witness list,

which may render moot some or all of Defendant’s objections. To promote the

orderly resolution of this matter, the Court finds that the parties should confer

regarding the witnesses they intend to call at trial, the substance of the

testimony, and any objections they may have. 

After an appropriate conference, the parties shall file a joint statement

listing the witnesses that each side intends to call at trial. The statement shall

include a brief summary of each witness’s testimony, the estimated length of the

testimony, and the nature of any objection to the testimony. The joint statement

shall be filed on or before August 11, 2006.

SO ORDERED this 2nd day of August, 2006.

 s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

United States District Judge

Case 4:03-cv-00208-SPM-AK Document 172 Filed 08/02/06 Page 2 of 2
4

ffi I nve nto ry Ex p e rtS e rv i ce

A division of the American Chemical Society

October 21,2013

Baze Chemical Company

ATTN: Mr. David C. Madoux

15A2 Fort Worth Street

Liberty, TX77575

Dear Mr. Madoux:

Thank you for your Inventory Expert Service (lES) order of October 10, 2013.

The processing results are attached.

To ensure efficient processing of your substance(s), it is important that these results are

included with your PMN report for when reporting to the EPA.

An invoice will be issued for the cost of the technical processing for your order.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide this service. lf you have any questions, please do not

hesitate to contacJ me.

Sincerely,

Jennifer Moore

CAS Client Services

Enclosure(s)

Phone :80&63 1 -1 884, 61 4-447 -387 O

Fax: 61 4-447-3747

E-mail: answers@cas.org

Web : www.cas. org/products/other-cas-products/client-services/

CAS . 2540 Olentangy River Road . P.O. Box 3343 . Columbus, OH 4.i1210-0334 . USA
I nve nto ry Ex p e rtS e rv i ce

A division of the American Chemical Society Phone: 800-631 -1 884, 614-447-3870

Fax:614-447-3747

E-mail : answers@cas.org

Web: www.cas.org/products/other-cas-products/client-services/

INVENTORY EXPERT SERVICE REPORT

IES Order Number: 363902

Registry Number : !4597 3B-7O-5

CA Index Name:

1., G-Hexanediamine, N L - ( 6-aminohe:ryl) -, polymer with 2- (chloromethyl) oxirane,

N-(dithiocarboxy) derivs., sodium salts

Please print the above CA Index Name on the appropriate page of your PMN.

lf this box is checked, CAS has made correction(s) marked in red to your IES order.

Please make the same corrections to your PMN before submitting it to the EPA.

CAS , 2540 Olentangy River Road . P.O. Box 3343 Cof umbus, OH 43210-0334 USA
###### Editorial Note on Part 3415

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 3415 appear at 76 FR 4811, Jan. 27, 2011.

#### § 3415.12 Conflicts of interest.

Members of peer review groups covered by this part are subject to relevant provisions contained in title 18 of the United States Code relating to criminal activity, Departmental regulations governing employee responsibilities and conduct (part O of this title), and Executive Order No. 11222, as amended.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. CASE NO.: 4:02cr52-SPM

ERIC EUGENE BALCOM,

Defendant.

____________________________/

ORDER EXTENDING TIME

This cause comes before the Court on Defendant Eric Eugene Balcom’s

motion (doc. 116) for extension of time to file a written explanation of excusable

neglect or good cause for filing his notice of appeal late. Upon consideration, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. Defendant’s motion (doc. 116) is granted.

2. Defendant shall have up to and including September 30, 2008, to

file his written explanation of excusable neglect or good cause.

 DONE AND ORDERED this 3rd day of September, 2008.

 s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

United States District Judge

Case 4:02-cr-00052-RH-CAS Document 117 Filed 09/03/08 Page 1 of 1
§ 3555.203 Ownership requirements. After the loan is closed, the borrower must have an acceptable ownership interest in the property as evidenced by one of the following: ( a ) *Fee-simple ownership.* Acceptable fee-simple ownership is evidenced by a fully marketable title with a deed vesting a fee-simple interest in the property to the borrower.
( b ) *Secured leasehold interest.* Loans may be guaranteed on leasehold properties. If the conditions in this subsection are met: ( 1 ) The applicant is unable to obtain fee simple title to the property;
( 2 ) Such leaseholds are fully marketable in the area, except in the case of properties located on American Indian restricted land;
( 3 ) The lease has an unexpired term of at least 45 years from the date of loan closing, except in the case of properties located on American Indian restricted land where the lease must have an unexpired term at least equal to the term of the loan. Leases on American Indian restricted land for period of 25 years which are renewable for a second 25 year period are permissible as are leases of a longer duration;
( 4 ) The mortgage must cover both the property improvements and the leasehold interest in the land;
( 5 ) The leasehold estate must constitute real property, be subject to the mortgage lien, be insured by a title policy, be assignable or transferable and cannot be terminated except for nonpayment of lease rents; and
( 6 ) The lease must be recorded in the appropriate local real estate records.
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2346 

To amend the Ojito Wilderness Act to make a technical correction. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 1, 2006 

Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself and Mr. DOMENICI) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend the Ojito Wilderness Act to make a technical 

correction. 

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

3 SECTION 1. OJITO WILDERNESS MAP. 

4 Section 2(1) of the Ojito Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 

5 1132 note; Public Law 109–94) is amended by striking 

6 ‘‘October 1, 2004’’ and inserting ‘‘January 24, 2006’’. 

Æ 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
Exhibit 10.3
  FIFTH AMENDMENT TO
AMENDED REVOLVING CREDIT AGREEMENT
 Agreement Parent Alon LP Borrower Borrowers Guarantor Company Guarantor Companies Agent Bank Leumi
  Lender Lenders Credit Agreement
   Definitions




---



##### 



Amendments to Credit Agreement
 New Definition
 Pricing Effective Date
 Deletion of Existing Definitions
            Amendment and Restatement of Existing Definitions
 Availability
 Base Rate Loan
 Eurodollar Loan Section 2.06(a).
 Obligations
 - 2 -




---



##### 



Termination Date
 Revolving Credit Commitments
  Interest; Revolving Credit Loans
  - 3 -




---



##### 



Reduction of Revolving Credit Commitment; Prepayment of Revolving Credit Loans
  Fees; Unused Line Fee
 Unused Line Fee
 Fees; Unused Loan Subfacility Fee
  Increases to the Facility Sublimit
 Reserved
 Letters of Credit
  - 4 -




---



##### 



Letters of Credit Fees
 Letter of Credit Issuance Fee Letter of Credit Amendment Fee
 Affirmative Covenant; Reporting Requirements
     - 5 -




---



##### 



- 6 -




---



##### 



Conditions to Effectiveness Fifth
Amendment Effective Date
 Amendment Fee
     - 7 -




---



##### 



Representations and Warranties
     - 8 -




---



##### 



Covenants
      Reservation of Rights
 - 9 -




---



##### 



Continued Effectiveness of Loan Documents
 Miscellaneous
        - 10 -




---



##### 



Borrower:ALON USA, LPBy:
    
    Alon USA GP, LLC, a Delaware limited
liability company, its general partnerBy:
    
    /s/ David WiessmanName: David WiessmanTitle: Executive Chairman of the Board of
Managers
 Fifth Amendment to the Amended Revolving Credit Agreement




---



##### 



Guarantor Companies:ALON USA OPERATING, INCALON USA REFINING, INC.ALON USA, INC.ALON USA ENERGY, INC.ALON USA CAPITAL, INC.ALON PARAMOUNT HOLDINGS, INC.By:
    
    /s/ David WiessmanName: David WiessmanTitle: Executive Chairman of the Board of DirectorsALON USA GP, LLC
ALON CRUDE PIPELINE, LLCBy:
    
    /s/ David WiessmanName: David WiessmanTitle: Executive Chairman of the Board of
ManagersALON ASSETS, INC.ALON
BRANDS, INC.By:
    
    /s/ David WiessmanName: David WiessmanTitle: Chairman of the Board of Directors
 Fifth Amendment to the Amended Revolving Credit Agreement




---



##### 



ALON USA DELAWARE, LLCALON PIPELINE LOGISTICS, LLCBy:
    
    /s/ David WiessmanName: David WiessmanTitle: President
 Fifth Amendment to the Amended Revolving Credit Agreement




---



##### 



Agent and Lender:ISRAEL DISCOUNT BANK OF NEW YORKBy:
    
    /s/Howard WeinbergName: Howard WeinbergTitle: First Senior Vice PresidentBy:
    
    /s/Itai ZalutzkiName: Itai ZalutzkiTitle: AVP
 Fifth Amendment to the Amended Revolving Credit Agreement




---



##### 



Lender and Co-arranger:BANK LEUMI USABy:
    
    /s/ Gil HershmanName: Gil HershmanTitle: Vice PresidentBy:
    
    /s/ Michaela KleinName: Michaela Klein, 212Title: Senior Vice President
 Fifth Amendment to the Amended Revolving Credit Agreement
## In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 21

- 00101

- CR

PHILLIP MICHAEL NUNEZ , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 196th District Court

Hunt County, Texas Trial Court No. 32289CR

Bef ore Morriss, C.J., Stevens and Carter, * JJ.

_________________ *Jack Carter, Justice, Retired , Sitting by Assignment

### O R D E R

Phillip Michael Nunez has filed an appeal from a judgment of conviction entered by the

196th Judicial District Court of Hu nt County. Nunez retained Kristin R. Brown to represent him
on appeal, but Brown has filed a motion to withdraw with this Court averr ing that she was unable
to find any non

- frivolous issue to raise on appeal. Brown’s motion satisfies the requirements of
Rule 6.5 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, and we hereby grant the motion to

withdraw. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 6.5. In light of these circumstances, we a bate this case to the trial court so that it may conduct
whatever hearings are necessary to make the following determinati ons: (1) whether Nunez still
desires to prosecute this appeal and, if so, (2) whether Nunez is indigent and entitled to the
appointme nt of counsel to represent him on appeal. If the trial court determines that Nunez is
indigent, then it shall appoint cou nsel to represent him on appeal.
The trial court may enter any orders necessary to implement these directives. Any
hearing shall be conducted by the trial court within fifteen days of the date of this order.
Appropriate orders and findings shall be sent to this Court in the form of a supplemental clerk’s
record within ten days of the date of the hearing contemplated by this order. Th e reporter’ s record of any hearing shall be filed with this Court within ten days of the date of the hearing
contemplated b y this order.
All appellate timetables are stayed and will resume on our receipt of the supplemental
appellate record.IT IS SO ORDE RED.

BY THE COURT

Date: March 15, 2022
§ 3555.2 Purpose. ( a ) *General.* The purpose of the SFHGLP is to provide low- and moderate-income persons who will live in rural areas with an opportunity to own decent, safe and sanitary dwellings and related facilities. The SFHGLP offers applicants without sufficient resources to provide the necessary housing on their own account, and unable to secure the credit necessary for such housing from other sources upon terms and conditions, which the applicant can reasonably be expected to fulfill without the guarantee, an opportunity to acquire, build, rehabilitate, improve, or relocate dwellings in rural areas.
( b ) *Demonstration programs.* Rural Development may authorize limited demonstration programs as allowed by law. The objective of these demonstration programs will be to test new approaches to offering housing under the statutory authority granted to the Secretary. Therefore, such demonstration programs may not be consistent with all of the provisions contained in this part. However, any statutory SFHGLP requirements will remain in effect.
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

FREDDIE L. BROWN,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 4:03cv87-RH/WCS

SGT. STEPHEN M. COYNE, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff, a pro se inmate, has filed a motion to vacate and set aside his

previously dismissed civil rights complaint. Doc. 72. It is assumed that Plaintiff seeks

relief from the final judgment. Plaintiff presents no basis for such relief and, thus, is

insufficient on its face under FED. R. CIV. P. 60. Rule 60 provides relief form judgment in

certain limited circumstances: (a) clerical mistakes; (b) mistake, inadvertence, surprise,

excusable neglect, newly discovered evidence, fraud, the judgment is void, or it "is no

longer equitable that the judgment should have prospective application . . . ." FED. R.

CIV. P. 60(a), (b). None of those reasons are apparent from Plaintiff's motion. 

Case 4:03-cv-00087-RH-WCS Document 73 Filed 06/03/05 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

1

 This case was dismissed pursuant to Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 114 S.

Ct. 2364, 129 L. Ed. 2d 383 (1994). Plaintiff could not demonstrate the favorable

termination requirement because criminal charges were outstanding and those charges

were based upon an arrest which was the basis of his constitutional claim. 

Case No. 4:03cv87-RH/WCS

Moreover, reasons such as mistake, newly discovered evidence, or fraud which

are presented to vacate the judgment may not be made "more than one year after the

judgment, order, or proceeding was entered or taken." FED. R. CIV. P. 60(b). More than

a year has passed since judgment was entered as Plaintiff's case was dismissed on

April 15, 2004.1 Plaintiff is not entitled to have the judgment vacated.

In light of the foregoing, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's motion

to vacate and set aside the judgment entered in this case, doc. 72, be DENIED. 

IN CHAMBERS at Tallahassee, Florida, on June 3, 2005.

 s/ William C. Sherrill, Jr. 

WILLIAM C. SHERRILL, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and

recommendations within 15 days after being served with a copy of this report and

recommendation. A party may respond to another party's objections within 10 days after

being served with a copy thereof. Failure to file specific objections limits the scope of

review of proposed factual findings and recommendations.

Case 4:03-cv-00087-RH-WCS Document 73 Filed 06/03/05 Page 2 of 2
7.000 Scope of part.       This part prescribes policies and procedures for-                                       (a)                    						            Developing acquisition plans;                                          (b)                    						            Determining whether to use commercial or Government resources for acquisition of supplies or services;                                          (c)                    						            Deciding whether it is more economical to lease equipment rather than purchase it; and                                          (d)                    						            Determining whether functions are inherently governmental.    **Parent topic:** Part 7 - Acquisition Planning
§ 319.41-1 Plant products permitted entry.[1] Except as restricted from certain countries and localities by special quarantines and other orders now in force,[2] and by such as may hereafter be promulgated, the following articles may be imported: ( a ) Subject only to the requirements of paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of § 319.41-5: ( 1 ) Green corn on the cob, in small lots for local use only, from adjacent areas of Canada.
( 2 ) Articles made of the stalks, leaves, or cobs of corn, when prepared, manufactured, or processed in such manner that in the judgment of the inspector no pest risk is involved in their entry.
( 3 ) Corn silk.
( b ) Upon compliance with the regulations in this subpart: ( 1 ) Broomcorn for manufacturing purposes, brooms or similar articles made of broomcorn, clean shelled corn, and clean seed of the other plants covered by § 319.41.
( 2 ) Corn on the cob, green or mature, from the provinces of Canada west of and including Manitoba,[3] and from Mexico, Central America, South America, the West Indies, the Bahamas, and Bermuda.
( c ) Seed of Indian corn or maize (*Zea mays L.*) that is free from the cob and from all other parts of corn may be imported into the United States from New Zealand without further restriction.
( d ) Immature, dehusked “baby” sweet corn may be imported from Zambia in accordance with § 319.56-2f(a).
[24 FR 10788, Dec. 29, 1959, as amended at 58 FR 44745, Aug. 25, 1993; 71 FR 29769, May 24, 2006] Footnotes -
319.41-1
[1] Except as provided in § 319.41-6 the regulations in this subpart do not authorize importations through the mails.
[2] The entry of the following plants and plant products is prohibited or restricted by specific quarantines and other restrictive orders now in force. (a) Living canes of sugarcane, or cuttings or parts thereof, from all foreign countries. (§ 319.15.) (b) Except as provided for in paragraph (c) for corn seed from New Zealand, seed and all other portions in the raw or unmanufactured state of Indian corn or maize (Zea mays L.), and the closely related plants, including all species of Teosinte (Euchlaena), jobs-tears (Coix), Polytoca, Chionachne, Sclerachne, and Trilobachne, from Australia, Burma, Cambodia, China, Formosa, India, Indonesia, Japan and adjacent islands, Laos, Malaya, Manchuria, New Guinea, New Zealand, North Viet-Nam, Oceania, Pakistan, Philippines, Ryukyu Islands, Thailand, and Viet-Nam. (§ 319.24.) (c) Seed of Indian corn or maize (*Zea mays L.*) that is free from the cob and from all other parts of corn may be imported into the United States from New Zealand without further restriction. (§ 319.24.).
[3] A quarantine is maintained by Canada to prevent spread of the European corn borer from the infested eastern areas to the still uninfested Provinces west of Ontario.
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________

NO. 09-15-00452-CV

____________________

MICHAEL WAYNE OSBORNE, Appellant

V.

NATHAN REYNOLDS JR., Appellee

________________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 172nd District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. E-197,332

________________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Michael Wayne Osborne filed a notice of appeal from interlocutory orders 

denying a motion for default judgment and denying a motion for a bench warrant. 

We notified the parties that our jurisdiction was not apparent from the notice of 

appeal and that the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction unless a 

response demonstrating this Court’s jurisdiction was filed by November 30, 2015. 

The appellant did not file a written response. 
2

Generally, an appeal may be taken only from a final judgment. Lehmann v. 

Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). Interlocutory orders may be 

appealed only if a statute authorizes an accelerated appeal. Bally Total Fitness 

Corp. v. Jackson, 53 S.W.3d 352, 352 (Tex. 2001); see Tex. R. App. P. 28.1. The 

appellant has not filed a response showing that the trial court has signed a final 

judgment or an order that is appealable at this time. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3. We 

dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).

APPEAL DISMISSED.

 ________________________________

 STEVE McKEITHEN

Chief Justice

Submitted on December 22, 2015

Opinion Delivered December 23, 2015

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Johnson, JJ.
### ·Swanson, Brian (OST)
From:. 

### Sent: 

### To: Subject: jcisle@charter.net Wednesday, August 15, 2012 9:26 AM Swanson, Brian (OST) Service for Brainerd, MN airport
SkyWest is the best choice to serve our Brainerd Regional Airport. Thankyou for your consideration, Jerry C. Isle 

### 218 831 3339

1 

## ll**~**'t .•
NEMS is a model of U.S. energy economy developed and maintained by the US 

Energy Information Administration (EIA) of the US Department of Energy 

(DOE). NEMS is used to produce the Annual Energy Outlook, a reference 

publication that provides detailed forecasts of the energy economy from 

the current year to 2035. DOE first developed NEMS in the 1980s, and the 

model has undergone frequent updates and expansion since. DOE uses the 

modeling system extensively to produce issue reports, legislative 

analyses, and respond to Congressional inquiries. 

US EPA docketed three National Energy Modeling System (NEMS) program 

files that EPA modified in order to use NEMS to estimate the national 

energy system impacts of the Final New Source Performance Standards and 

Amendments to the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutants for the Oil and Natural Gas Industry. These codes are part of 

the larger set of source code that constitutes NEMS. Interested parties 

should contact the US Energy Information for more information on NEMS or 

obtaining the complete source code.

The three files are:

1. wellcost.f (part of the Oil and Gas Supply Module)

2. ngitm.f (part of the Natural Gas Transmission and Distribution Module) 

3. ngtdm.f (part of the Natural Gas Transmission and Distribution Module)

Brief explanations of how the codes were modified are provided within 

each program file. However, for more detail, the reader should 

consultSection 7 of the Regulatory Impact Analysis which is also 

availablein the Docket.
#### § 4279.200 OMB control number.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the information collection requirements contained in this rule have been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under OMB Control Number 0570-0069 for OMB approval.