alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### Ground water in the Meriden area, Connecticut

By: Gerald Ashley Waring

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/wsp449

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (pdf) 
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

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.
Brent R. Cole 

Law Office of Brent R. Cole, P.C. 

821 N Street, Suite 208 

Anchorage, AK 99501 

(907) 277-8001 

Attorneys for Redemption Air, Inc. 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

In the matter of: 

Redemption Air, Inc. 

) 

) FAA Case No. 2013AL030106 

) Docket No. FAA-2014-0115 

______________ ) (Civil Penalty Action) 

MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY. IMPOSE 

SANCTIONS, AND ORDER REDEMPTION AIR BE REIMBURSED 

Comes now Redemption Air, Inc. ("Redemption Air"), by and through counsel of 

record, the Law Office of Brent R. Cole, P.C., and moves this Court for an order 

compelling the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA") to make Christina Bryant (Ms. 

Bryant") available to be deposed pursuant to 13 CFR § 13.2200) or, in the alternative, 

impose sanctions precluding her testimony or evidence of her testimony at the hearing 

pursuant to 13 CFR § 13.220(n). Further, this Court should require the FAA to reimburse 

Redemption Air for expenses incurred as a result of Ms. Bryant's failure to appear at the 

time and location for her previously scheduled deposition. This motion is supported by a 

memorandum of law filed concurrently herewith. A proposed order is attached for the 

Court's convenience. 

Motion to Compel Discovery, Impose 

Sanctions, and Order Redemption Air be Reimbursed 

In re: Redemption Air, Inc., Docket No. F AA-20 14-0115 

Page I of2 
DATED this Jr. day of December, 2014, at Anchorage, Alaska. 

was 

®Mailed '\ 

[J Hand-delivered -!- Q_II'\IM 

1:)11 Faxed 

to the following: 

Original and one copy: 

Attention; Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2WIOOO 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

One copy: 

Craig Wm. Black, Esq. 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

222 West 7th Avenue, #14 

Anchorage, AK 99513-7587 

Craig.B1ack@faa.gov 

Fax: 271-2800 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law 

Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department ofTransportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (EII-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

Richard.Goodwin@dot.gov 

Faxn2-366-75~ rtJJJ~ 

Ca~ 

Motion to Compel Discovery, Impose 

Sanctions, and Order Redemption Air be Reimbursed 

LAW OFFICE OF BRENT R. COLE, P.C. 

Attorneys for Redemption Air, Inc. 

By:~ Cc... 

Brent R. Cole 

AK State Bar No. 8606074 

In re: Redemption Air, Inc., Docket No. FAA-2014-0115 

Page 2 of2
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Office of the Secretary

          - [Transmittal Nos. 10-66]

# AGENCY:

Defense Security Cooperation Agency, Department of Defense.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 July 1996.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. B. English, DSCA/DBO/CFM, (703) 601-3740.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Transmittal 10-66 with attached transmittal, policy justification, and Sensitivity of Technology.

Dated: December 28, 2010.

Morgan F. Park,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

      ( print page 108)          ( print page 109)          ( print page 110)          ( print page 111)    

BILLING CODE 5001-06-P

BILLING CODE 5001-06-C

[FR Doc. 2010-33036 Filed 12-30-10; 8:45 am]
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 Quarterly Report of First Health Group Corp. (the
 "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2003, as filed with
 the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
 I, Joseph E. Whitters, Chief Financial Officer of 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:

      (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.


 /s/ Joseph E. Whitters

 Joseph E. Whitters
 Chief Financial Officer
 August 8, 2003
[No. 20149-6-II.

Division Two.

November 21, 1997.]

#### Kenneth D. Lambrecht, *Respondent,*v. Donna J. Steinman, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Clark County, No. 94-2-00979-0, James D. Ladley, J., entered November 3, 1995. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Bridgewater, A.C.J., concurred in by Morgan and Armstrong, JJ.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Martin DOMINGUEZ, a/k/a Sal Sosa, Gordo and Martin Beltran-Dominguez, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 04-50373.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Oct. 11, 2005.*

Decided Oct. 21, 2004.

Mark A. Young, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Criminal Division, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

G. David Haigh, Esq., Law Offices of G. David Haigh, Santa Ana, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: T.G. NELSON, WARDLAW, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Martin Dominguez appeals his 272-month sentence, imposed following a guilty-plea conviction for one count of conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841(a)(1). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

Dominguez contends that the district court improperly enhanced his sentence based on facts not found beyond a reasonable doubt, *see United States v. Booker,*— U.S. -, -, 125 S.Ct. 738, 748, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), and he preserved this objection by raising it below. The govern*501ment contends that there was no constitutional error in his sentencing because Dominguez admitted the facts underlying the four-level sentencing enhancement in his plea agreement and at the change of plea hearing. We disagree.

The admissions made by Dominguez do not establish that he was a leader under U.S.S.G. § 3Bl.l(a), which directs the district court to consider the exercise of decision-making authority, the nature of participation in the commission of the offense, the recruitment of accomplices, the claimed right to a larger share of the fruits of the crime, the degree of participation in planning or organizing the offense, the nature and scope of the illegal activity, and the degree of control and authority exercised over others. *See*U.S.S.G. § BBl.l(a), Application Note 4; *see also United States v. Lopez-Sandoval,*146 F.3d 712, 717 (9th Cir.1998) (reversing U.S.S.G. § 3Bl.l(a) enhancement for lack of evidence that defendant exercised any control or organizational authority over others).

It is unclear from the record whether the district court was relying exclusively on Dominguez’s admissions in applying the leadership enhancement, or whether additional facts were considered. Because the admissions during sentencing were insufficient to support the enhancement, and, if additional facts were considered, it would have constituted Sixth Amendment error to enhance the sentence beyond the then-mandatory Guidelines range, we vacate the sentence and remand for re-sentencing pursuant to *Booker,*125 S.Ct. at 769.

SENTENCE VACATED AND REMANDED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
#### § 1140.2 Purpose.

The purpose of this part is to establish restrictions on the sale, distribution, and use of cigarettes, smokeless tobacco, and covered tobacco products in order to reduce the number of children and adolescents who use these products, and to reduce the life-threatening consequences associated with tobacco use.

[81 FR 29102, May 10, 2016]
From: "Frey, Nathan J." <Nathan_J._Frey@omb.eop.gov>

To: Lori Stewart/DC/USEPA/US@EPA Cc: Karl Simon/DC/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 05/10/2011 02:23 PM Subject: EO 12866 Interagency Comments - E15 misfueling rule 

### Attached please find interagency comments under EO 12866 for the E15 misfueling rule ( 2060 -AQ17 ). Please let me know if you have any questions.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1


                            LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES




         The following is a list of subsidiaries that are directly or indirectly
owned by the Company as of March 24, 1998 (unless otherwise indicated, the
subsidiaries are 100% beneficially owned by the Company):

Kelly Paper Company
BT Office Products International Holdings, Inc.
BT OPE Holdings, Inc.
BT Office Products Europe BV
BT Office Products Europe CV
UK Bel BV
Blees van Os BV
Jonkers International BV
Tim voor Kantoor BV
BT Office Products Nederland BV
Veenman Kantoormachines BV
Veenman Office Management BV
Direct Dealer Services Nederland BV
Repro Copiers Nederland BV
Kuipers Centrum voor Kantoorefficiency BV
Printplus Ltd.
Copygraphic Plc
BT Office Products Deutschland Verwaltungs mbH
BT Office Products Vertriebs GmbH & Co. KG
Keller Buromatic GmbH
Buroeinrichtungshaus Roth GmbH
BT Office Products Deutschland GmbH
Frings Burobedurf Joseph Frings GmbH & Co. KG
Frings & Pohl Burobedorf Handels GmbH
Kruse Burotechnik GmbH
Kruse Buroleasing GmbH
Franz Becker Burosysteme GmbH
Pfeffer Burotechnik GmbH
Bierbrauer + Nagel GmbH & Co KG
Bierbrauer + Nagel Verwaltungs GmbH
Classic Office Products GmbH & Co. KG
Albert Martz GmbH
Albert Martz GmbH & Co. KG
Glockler GmbH
Gesellschaft fur Mal und Zeichenbedarf GmbH
Classic Office Products GmbH
Hartmann GmbH
BVZ GmbH & Co KG (99%)
Nett + Wurth GmbH
BT Office Products Sweden AB
Vinborgen i Boras AB
AB JF Bjorsell

<PAGE>   2

Averstedt Kontorsservice AB
Kungsbacka Kontorsvarulus AB
Konlev AB
Bjorsells JUSTNU-tryck AB
Bjorsells Kontorsvaruhus i Kalmar AB
Ake Wengbrand Kontorsmaskiner AB
Bjorsells Kontorsvaruhus i AB Visby
Helsingburgs Kontorsvaruhus AB (42.5%)
Bjorsells Polska Ltd (51%)
### Ground-water conditions in the Avenal-McKittrick area, Kings and Kern Counties, California

By: Perry Rowley WoodG. H. Davis

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/wsp1457

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 4**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 5**                            (pdf) 
- NGMDB Index Page:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**                            (html)
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

No abstract available.

#### 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.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer of Systemax Inc., hereby
certifies that to the best of his knowledge Systemax Inc.s Form 10-K for the Year
Ended December 31, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78 (o)(d)) and that the
information contained in such Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of Systemax Inc.

Dated: August 29, 2006

/s/ RICHARD LEEDS
Richard Leeds, Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 31.2  CERTIFICATION  I, Anders A. Suarez, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Amerityre Corporation;  2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this 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 report;  4. The registrant's other certifying officer 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:  (a) 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 is made known to us by others, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; and  (b) 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  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (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.  5. The registrant's other certifying officer 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):  (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses 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  (b) 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: September 12, 2006  /s/Anders A. Suarez
Anders A. Suarez
Chief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-8159

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

BRYANT EVERETT PLANTER, a/k/a B.P.,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, District 

Judge. (2:10-cr-00168-MSD-FBS-1; 2:11-cv-00562-MSD)

Submitted: March 26, 2013 Decided: March 29, 2013

Before DUNCAN, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bryant Everett Planter, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Marie Everhart, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia; Scott W. 

Putney, Assistant United States Attorney, Newport News, 

Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Bryant Everett Planter seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 

Supp. 2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a 

circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). A certificate of 

appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of 

the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) 

(2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a 

prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that 

reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s 

assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. 

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. 

Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). When the district court 

denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must 

demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is 

debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the 

denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude 

that Planter has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, 

we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           3,767
<SECURITIES>                                     3,185
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,218
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                17,419
<PP&E>                                           1,652
<DEPRECIATION>                                     326
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  21,372
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,525
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        18,359
<OTHER-SE>                                         488
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    21,372
<SALES>                                         15,789
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                15,789
<CGS>                                            7,824
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    7,824
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,437
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,795
<INCOME-TAX>                                       700
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,095
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,095
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .09
        

</TABLE>
IV 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 955 

Calling for sustainable peace in the Middle East. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 26, 2006 

Mr. FARR submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on International Relations 

RESOLUTION 

Calling for sustainable peace in the Middle East. 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) calls on all parties in the Middle East to ob3 serve a cease-fire and renew efforts to create a sus4 tainable peace; 

5 (2) calls on the United States and the inter6 national community to assist in the reconstruction 

7 and rebuilding efforts in areas in the Middle East 

8 that are affected by violence; and 

9 (3) urges all parties to recognize the right of 

10 the State of Israel to exist. 

Æ 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
<PAGE>   1

                                                                   Exhibit 23.1


                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of
EPL Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") on Forms S-3 (Nos. 333-42185 and
333-09719) and on Forms S-8 (Nos. 333-4306, 333-9795 and 333-4207) of our report
dated April 18, 2000 (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes
explanatory paragraphs referring to the existence of substantial doubt about
the Company's ability to continue as a going concern and the restatement
described in Note 18) appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of EPL
Technologies, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 1999.



Deloitte & Touche LLP
Philadelphia, PA
April 18, 2000