alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
P.1 

•"Y 

/*l(lo)f*?>K-£~% 

UNION 

CARBIDE 

UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION 3 9 OLD RIDGEBURY ROAD, DANBURY. CT 06817-000 1 

Corporate Health, Safety and Environmental Affairs Department 

July 10, 1986 

Ms. Barbara Hostage 

Emergency Response Division 

WH-548/B 

Environmental Protection Agency 

402 M Street SW 

Washington, DC 20460 

Re: Meeting to Discuss Continuous Emissions 

Dear Barbara: 

This letter confirms our telephone conversation of July 7 wherein we 

agreed to meet at 10:00 a.m. July 18 at the EPA Washington offices to discuss 

"continuous emissions." I enclosed the list of industry representatives and 

their affiliations as well as those individuals from EPA that you have 

identified have an interest in this issue. I suggest that we notify each 

other, if there are any changes in the above list of attendees. 

As discussed on the telephone, we would like to address the following 

matters: 

° Definition of continuous releases; 

0 Annual notification mechanism for continuous releases; 

0 EPA rulemaking; 

° Suggestions on interim approaches. 

We look forward to meeting with you and others on July 18. 

Sincerely, 

R. F. Kelley 

0767F 

Enclosure 
P.2 

•v . 

List of Attendees 

Discussion of Continuous Emissions Issue 

Industry 

Robert F. Kelley - Union Carbide Corporation 

Tom Lingafelter - Dow Chemical 

M. Mullins - Monsanto Company 

B. L. Taranto - Exxon Chemical Americas 

W. H. Walsh - E. I. duPont de Nemours & Co. 

EPA 

B. Hostage - Emergency Response Division 

N. Parkinson - Emergency Response Division 

E. La Pointe - Office of Assistant Administrator, Solid Waste and 

Emergency Response 

C. Wheling - Office of General Counsel 

J. Riley - Emergency Response Division 

T. Field - Emergency Response Division 

076 7F
Editorial Note on Part 851
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 851 appear at 88 FR 41293, June 26, 2023.

§ 851.42 Preliminary notice of violation. ( a ) Based on a determination by the Enforcement Director that there is a reasonable basis to believe a contractor has violated or is continuing to violate a requirement of this part, the Enforcement Director may issue a preliminary notice of violation (PNOV) to the contractor.
( b ) A PNOV must indicate: ( 1 ) The date, facts, and nature of each act or omission upon which each alleged violation is based;
( 2 ) The particular requirement involved in each alleged violation;
( 3 ) The proposed remedy for each alleged violation, including the amount of any civil penalty; and
( 4 ) The obligation of the contractor to submit a written reply to the Enforcement Director within 30 calendar days of receipt of the PNOV.
( c ) A reply to a PNOV must contain a statement of all relevant facts pertaining to an alleged violation. ( 1 ) The reply must: ( i ) State any facts, explanations and arguments that support a denial of the alleged violation;
( ii ) Demonstrate any extenuating circumstances or other reason why a proposed remedy should not be imposed or should be mitigated;
( iii ) Discuss the relevant authorities that support the position asserted, including rulings, regulations, interpretations, and previous decisions issued by DOE; and
( iv ) Furnish full and complete answers to any questions set forth in the preliminary notice.
( 2 ) Copies of all relevant documents must be submitted with the reply.
( d ) If a contractor fails to submit a written reply within 30 calendar days of receipt of a PNOV: ( 1 ) The contractor relinquishes any right to appeal any matter in the preliminary notice; and
( 2 ) The preliminary notice, including any proposed remedies therein, constitutes a final order.
( e ) A copy of the PNOV must be prominently posted, once final, at or near the location where the violation occurred until the violation is corrected.
[71 FR 6931, Feb. 9, 2006, as amended at 88 FR 41294, June 26, 2023]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM JASON
INCORPORATED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT MARCH 28,1997, AND CONSOLIDATED
INCOME STATEMENT FOR THE THREE MONTH PERIOD ENDED MARCH 28, 1997.  AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000813471
<NAME> JASON INCORPORATED
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-26-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-28-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-28-1997
<CASH>                                            1487
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    74825
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0<F1>
<INVENTORY>                                      36936
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                141193
<PP&E>                                          157453
<DEPRECIATION>                                   68814
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  320527
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            78691
<BONDS>                                         126040<F2>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         34687
<OTHER-SE>                                       62390
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    320527
<SALES>                                         125227
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                125227
<CGS>                                           102055
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   102055
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                2706
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   3664
<INCOME-TAX>                                      1429
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               2235
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      2235
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F3>
<FN>
<F1>COMPANY PRESENTS RECEIVABLES ON A NET BASIS IN COMPLIANCE WITH ARTICLE 10
REGULATION S-X.
<F2>INCLUDES ALL NON-CURRENT PORTION OF DEBT OBLIGATIONS.
<F3>NOT REPORTED.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 21-0015

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

WILLIAM LOWREY HESSE,

Defendant and Appellant.

GRANT

Pursuant to authority granted under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1), the 

Appellant is given an extension of time until May 17, 2021, to prepare, 

file, and serve the Appellant’s opening brief. 

Electronically signed by:

Bowen Greenwood

Clerk of the Supreme Court

April 15 2021

04/15/2021

Case Number: DA 21-0015
#### KLEBOLD PRESS v. ELMORE.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department.

January 7, 1915.)

Contracts (§ 94*)—Fraud—Promissory Misrepresentations.

Misrepresentations, promissory in their nature, are not a basis for defense of fraud to a written contract.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Contracts, Cent. Dig. §§ 420-430, 1160, 1164, 1165; Dec. Dig. § 94.*]

Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, First District.

Action by the Klebold Press against Edward N. Elmore. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals. Reversed, and new trial ordered.

Argued November term, 1914, before LEHMAN, DELANY, and WHITAKER, JJ.

I. Gainsburg, of New York City, for appellant.

Emery C. Weller, of New York City, for respondent.

*

For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes

LEHMAN, J.

The plaintiff sued upon a written contract. The an-. swer set up a general denial, and attempted to set forth fraudulent misrepresentations; but all these alleged misrepresentations were promissory in their nature, and, if made, could give rise to no defense of fraud. Nevertheless, the learned trial justice admitted evidence as to these so-called misrepresentations, and gave judgment for the defendant.

*979The appellant now urges that this testimony was clearly incompetent, for, even if true, it would tend only to vary the contract, and would give no ground for its avoidance. The point raised by it is clearly correct, and the respondent does not, in his brief, even argue against this position, but urges merely that the proof shows that the plaintiff failed to comply with the written contract. The plaintiff has, however, sufficiently shown performance of the contract, and the judgment is evidently based upon the proof of alleged misrepresentations. It follows that the judgment must be reversed.

Judgment should be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. All concur.
#### § 2245.300 Whom in the Corporation does a recipient who is an individual notify about a criminal drug conviction?

A recipient who is an individual and is required under 2 CFR 182.300(b) to notify Federal agencies about a conviction for a criminal drug offense must notify the Corporation's awarding official or other designee.
MISCELLANEOUS DISMISSALS

2007-1630.

#### Wolanin v. Holmes.

Cuyahoga App. No. 88454, 2007-Ohio-3410. This cause is pending before the court as a discretionary appeal. Upon consideration of appellants’ application for dismissal,

It is ordered by the court that the application for dismissal is granted. Accordingly, this cause is dismissed.
#### § 950.41 Monitoring/Auditing.

The Department has the right to audit any and all costs associated with the Standby Support Contracts. Auditors who are employees of the United States government, who are designated by the Secretary of Energy or by the Comptroller General of the United States, shall have access to, and the right to examine, at the sponsor's site or elsewhere, any pertinent documents and records of a sponsor at reasonable times under reasonable circumstances. The Secretary may direct the sponsor to submit to an audit by a public accountant or equivalent acceptable to the Secretary.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-60600

Summary Calendar

__________________

MARIE S. PRINGLE,

 Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

HENRY DAVIS, Board President, ET AL.,

 Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 3:94-CV-175

- - - - - - - - - -

August 1, 1996

Before SMITH, DUHÉ, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Marie S. Pringle appeals the dismissal of her lawsuit

raising various federal and state law claims against a myriad of

defendants. Pringle's motion to strike two appellate briefs

submitted by two appellees is DENIED.

We have carefully reviewed the record and the appellate

arguments. We discern no reversible error by the district court

in its dismissal.
No.

-2-

AFFIRMED.
#### § 861.7 Applicability of other laws.

Nothing in this part shall be construed to affect the applicability of the provisions of State laws or of other Federal laws.
IV 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 824 

Opposing the detention and deportation of Iraqi Chaldean Christians. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 12, 2018 

Mr. MOOLENAAR (for himself, Mrs. LAWRENCE, Mr. HUIZENGA, Mr. LEVIN, 

Mrs. DINGELL, Mr. TROTT, Mr. BISHOP of Michigan, Mr. KILDEE, Mr. 

WALBERG, Mr. BERGMAN, and Mr. UPTON) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Opposing the detention and deportation of Iraqi Chaldean 

Christians. 

Whereas the United States has traditionally had an important role as a safe harbor for persecuted religious minorities; 

Whereas the Trump Administration has pledged to prioritize 

the defense of persecuted minorities in the Middle East 

and around the world; 

Whereas the United States Congress and the Department of 

State have recognized that genocide has been committed 

against the religious minorities of Iraq; 

Whereas Chaldean Christians represent a significant religious 

minority in Iraq; 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 824 IH 

Whereas the Chaldean community of Iraq faces active persecution by both state and nonstate actors; 

Whereas the Department of Homeland Security has detained 

several hundred Chaldeans living in the United States for 

possible deportation to Iraq; 

Whereas any Chaldean deported to Iraq will be subject to discrimination, violent persecution, and possibly death; and 

Whereas the Chaldean community represents a vibrant and 

important part of United States culture and society: 

Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) opposes the detention and possible removal 

3 of Iraqi Chaldeans; and 

4 (2) urges President Donald Trump to use his 

5 executive authority and discretion to defer deporta6 tion for Iraqi Chaldeans living in the United States. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

                                                            

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL QUARTER ENDED
SEPTEMBER 30, 1996, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE FISCAL QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1996.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           3,245
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   35,316
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     47,313
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                90,887
<PP&E>                                          14,719
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 105,606
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           50,310
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    16,035,585
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   105,606
<SALES>                                         41,525
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                41,525
<CGS>                                           27,783
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   27,783
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                11,169
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (299)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,357
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (235)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,122
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### § 436.10 Purpose.

This subpart establishes a methodology and procedures for estimating and comparing the life cycle costs of Federal buildings, for determining the life cycle cost effectiveness of energy conservation measures and water conservation measures, and for rank ordering life cycle cost effective measures in order to design a new Federal building or to retrofit an existing Federal building. It also establishes the method by which efficiency shall be considered when entering into or renewing leases of Federal building space.

[61 FR 32649, June 25, 1996]
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-6542

HARRY BRANTLEY,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

GENE JOHNSON, Director for the VA Department of Corrections,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at 

Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (1:16-cv-00661-GBL-JFA)

Submitted: July 19, 2018 Decided: July 24, 2018

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Harry Brantley, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Harry Brantley seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28

U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the 

notice of appeal was not timely filed.

Parties are accorded 30 days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or 

order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the 

appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. 

App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional 

requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on September 12, 2017. The 

notice of appeal was filed, at the earliest, on May 6, 2018.

1 Because Brantley failed to file 

a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period,2 we 

deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, deny Brantley’s motion to appoint counsel, and 

dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions 

are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

DISMISSED

 1 For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of 

appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly delivered to prison officials for 

mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988).

2 Although the district court did not rule on Brantley’s Rule 4(a)(6) motion, we 

conclude that a remand is not necessary as the motion was untimely.
#### First National Bank of Oregon, Respondent, v. Burton Goldstein, Appellant.

of the 'Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered March 27, 1968, affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. It appears from the record that the levy under the order of attachment obtained by appellant was made within four months of the date that his employer, an Oregon corporation, was adjudged a bankrupt. Accordingly, any lien created thereby against the corporation is deemed to he null and void because it constitutes an act of bankruptcy (Bankruptcy Act, § 67, subd. [a], par. [1]; TJ. 'S. 'Code, tit. 11, § 107, subd. [a], par. [1]; see Collier, Bankruptcy Manual [2d ed.], § 3.03). Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Hopkins, Munder and Martuseello, JJ., concur.
Editorial Note on Part 10
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear at 68 FR 24879, May 9, 2003, and at 88 FR 45064, July 14, 2023.

§ 10.60 Referral by court. ( a ) This section applies when a Federal, State, or local court holds in abeyance, or refers to the Commissioner, any matter for an initial administrative determination under § 10.25(c) or § 10.45(b).
( b ) The Commissioner shall promptly agree or decline to accept a court referral. Whenever feasible in light of agency priorities and resources, the Commissioner shall agree to accept a referral and shall proceed to determine the matter referred.
( c ) In reviewing the matter, the Commissioner may use the following procedures: ( 1 ) Conferences, meetings, discussions, and correspondence under § 10.65.
( 2 ) A hearing under parts 12, 13, 14, 15, or 16.
( 3 ) A notice published in the Federal Register requesting information and views.
( 4 ) Any other public procedure established in other sections of this chapter and expressly applicable to the matter under those provisions.
( d ) If the Commissioner's review of the matter results in a proposed rule, the provisions of § 10.40 or § 10.50 also apply.
H. Res. 934

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

December 7, 2006.

Whereas life and death situations confront hundreds of thousands of persons within the United States each year due 

to life threatening illness or injury; 

Whereas advance directives offer individuals the opportunity 

to discuss with loved ones and family members in advance and decide what measures would be appropriate for 

them when it comes to end-of-life care; 

Whereas the preparation of an advance directive, would advise family members, medical providers, and other persons of how an individual would want to be treated in 

certain crisis situations; 

Whereas physicians, other health care providers, clergy, legal 

counsel, and family members should, or may, provide 

guidance and insight into determining the final wishes of 

a person when an advance directive is being prepared; 

Whereas to avoid any legal or medical confusion due to the 

emotions involved in end-of-life decisions, it is in the best 

interest of all Americans that each person over the age 

of 18 communicate his or her wishes by creating an advance directive; and 

Whereas the designation of the first week of April each year 

as Plan Ahead with an Advance Directive Week would 
2

•HRES 934 EH 

give honor and respect to all persons as they make critical decisions about their end-of-life care and allow death 

with dignity according to their own decisions: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives—

(1) supports the goals and ideals of Plan Ahead 

with an Advance Directive Week; 

(2) encourages each person in the United States 

who is over the age of 18 to prepare an advance directive 

to assist his or her family members and medical professionals and others as they honor his or her final wishes; 

and 

(3) encourages medical, civic, educational, religious, 

and other nonprofit organizations to encourage individuals to prepare advance directives to ensure that their 

wishes and rights with respect to end-of-life care are 

protected. 

Attest:

Clerk.
#### § 200.328 Financial reporting.

Unless otherwise approved by OMB, the Federal awarding agency must solicit only the OMB-approved governmentwide data elements for collection of financial information (at time of publication the Federal Financial Report or such future, OMB-approved, governmentwide data elements available from the OMB-designated standards lead. This information must be collected with the frequency required by the terms and conditions of the Federal award, but no less frequently than annually nor more frequently than quarterly except in unusual circumstances, for example where more frequent reporting is necessary for the effective monitoring of the Federal award or could significantly affect program outcomes, and preferably in coordination with performance reporting. The Federal awarding agency must use OMB-approved common information collections, as applicable, when providing financial and performance reporting information.