alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION. UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE

.

IN THE 

# A RIZONA 

# C OURT OF 

# A PPEALS

D IVISION O NE

STATE OF ARIZONA , Respondent ,

v.
GARY LANE EISENMANN , Petitioner

. No. 1 CA

- CR 22

- 0514 PRPC

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No s

. CR2012

- 009381

- 001, CR2014

- 001133

- 001 The Honorable Kathleen H. Mead , Judge (Retired) REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL Maricopa County Attorney’s Office , Phoenix By Daniel Strange Counsel for Respondent Gary Lane Eisenmann , Eloy Petitioner FILED 5-11-2023STATE v. EISENMANN Decision of the Court

2 MEMORANDUM DECISION Presiding Judge Jennifer M. Perkins, Judge Angela K. Paton , and Judge D. Steven Williams delivered the decision of the Court

.

PER CURIAM : ¶1 Petitioner Gary Lane Eisenmann seeks review of the superior court’s order dismissing his petition for post

- conviction relief, filed pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. This is his first petition. ¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or error of law, this court will not disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for post

- convic tion relief. State v. Gutierrez , 229 Ariz. 573, 577, ¶ 19 (2012). It is petitioner’s burden to show that the superior court abused its discretion by denying the petition for post

- conviction relief. See State v. Poblete , 227 Ariz. 537, 538, ¶ 1 (App. 201 1) (petitioner has burden of establishing abuse of discretion on review). ¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, as well as the superior court’s order dismissing the petition for post

- conviction, the petition, response, reply , and additional related filings . Petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion. ¶4 For the foregoing reasons, we grant review but deny relief.
WF(1)ORISPL:N/ABoiler ID:Unit 1Plant:SJGSUtility:N/AThe following combinations of control technologies may be used on wall fired boilers.Click on the button to the right of a particular combination to see detailed results.Primary ControlTechnologyCostEffectivenessSecondary ControlTechnologyCostEffectivenessTotal CostEffectivenessNew EmissionRateLNB $556 none - $556 0.20LNB with Overfire Air $638 none - $638 0.16Gas Reburn $1,375 none - $1,375 0.18SCR (70-80%) $1,884 none - $1,884 0.10LNB $556 Gas Reburn $2,059 $1,226 0.12LNB with Overfire Air $638 Gas Reburn $2,689 $1,267 0.09LNB $556 SCR (70%) $3,756 $2,162 0.10LNB with Overfire Air $638 SCR (70%) $6,142 $2,327 0.10Gas Reburn $1,375 SCR (70%) $4,711 $2,709 0.10LNB $556 SNCR (40%) $2,598 $1,466 0.12LNB with Overfire Air $638 SNCR (40%) $3,393 $1,483 0.10Gas Reburn $1,375 SNCR (40%) $2,892 $1,944 0.11Click on the buttons below to see the cost effectiveness of each combination as a function of capacity factoror uncontrolled NOx rate.Page 1
D Work together with

attorney to prepare

for hearing r

:

Review evidence -

DHelpdeterminethe

theory of the case

-

0 Appeals and

Hearings

Prehering Preparation

1
C Allows both

sides to be

heard in an

informal setting.

conference

C Depositions, other discovery, motions

Negotiated Resolutions

The Petitioner

D Files the appeal

0 Responds to the Department’s case

2
0 Evidence reasonably

calculated to lead to

admissible evidence.

0 Providers have a right to

• obtain information the

Department relied on for its: action.

0 

p

0 Has burden of proof

C Presents case first

(Case-inchief)

C Responds to Petitioner’s

case lRebuttal case)

Depositions...

O Relaxl!l What’s

the worst that can

happen?

DISCOVERY DEPOSITIONS

3
Refreshing your Recollection

D If you forget, say

-. You will be able to refresh your

memory

Tips for Testifying

Tell the truth

0 Usten to the question 0 Understand the

question

Answer the question being asked

0 Don’t offer extra information

0 Remain cairn and

. professional

e

direct

0 Petitioner’s case

0 Department’s rebuttal case

C Closing Argument

C Decision

4
The Hearing Room

0 Physical setting - informal.

O Hearing examiner.

O Testimony is recorded.

O Witnesses face examiner.

O Informal, but dress professionally.

Questions?

5
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            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 Central Wireless, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each
of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

      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 operation of the
Company.

Date: July 14, 2004                    By: /s/ Kenneth W. Brand
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Name:  Kenneth W. Brand
                                           Title: Chief Executive Officer and
                                                  Acting Chief Executive Officer

      A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
other document authentications, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Central
Wireless, Inc. and will be retained by Central Wireless, Inc. and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-6731

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JOHN LENWOOD WRIGHT, a/k/a June Bug, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, District Judge. (CR-02-539; CA-04-1370-1) Submitted: September 14, 2005 Decided: November 16, 2005 Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Lenwood Wright, Appellant Pro Se. Kimberly Riley Pedersen, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: John Lenwood Wright seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2255 proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). 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) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of his constitutional c laims is debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Wright 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 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
###### Editorial Note on Part 316

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 316 appear at 69 FR 13717, Mar. 24, 2004.

#### § 316.50 Guidance documents.

FDA's Office of Orphan Products Development will maintain and make publicly available a list of guidance documents that apply to the regulations in this part. The list is maintained on the Internet and is published annually in the Federal Register. A request for a copy of the list should be directed to the Office of Orphan Products Development, Food and Drug Administration, Bldg. 32, rm. 5271, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993.

[78 FR 35135, June 12, 2013]
# C_2015034EN.01001202.xml

| 2.2.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 34/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.2.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 34/12

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus (Finland) lodged on 18 November 2014 — SOVAG — Schwarzmeer und Ostsee Versicherungs-Aktiengesellschaft v If Vahinkovakuutusyhtiö Oy

(Case C-521/14)

(2015/C 034/13)

Language of the case: Finnish

Referring court

Referring court

Korkein oikeus

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: SOVAG — Schwarzmeer und Ostsee Versicherungs-Aktiengesellschaft

Appellant:

Respondent: If Vahinkovakuutusyhtiö Oy

Respondent:

Question referred

Question referred

Is Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 (1) on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters to be interpreted as covering an action, such as that described above, on a warranty or guarantee or another equivalent claim closely linked to the original action, which is brought by a third party, as permitted by national law, against one of the parties with a view to its being heard in the same court proceedings?

1

---

(1)  OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1.

1

---
CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD



### SIP APPROVABILITY CHECKLIST--ENFORCEABILITY

- 

### PAGE 1

District: South CoastAirQuality Management District Rule No.: 1610 Date Amended: May 9, 1997 Rule Title: Old-Vehicle Scrapping
APPLICABILITY a. What sources are being regulated? 

### Stationary and indirect emission sources subiectto otherspecific rules and regulations, such as Regulations XI, XIII, and XX. See Sections (a), (c)(1), and 

### (i) [Rule 1610 1. b. What exemptions are provided? See Section(s) N/A [Rule 1. c. What is the calculation procedure forexemptions? See Section(s) N/A [Rule 1. d. Is the averaging time used in the rule greaterthan that ofthe applicable federal ambient standard(s)? No. See Section(s) N/A [Rule 

### 1. e. What are the units of compliance? Total pounds ofVOC, NOx, CO. or PM. See Section (h)(1) [Rule 1610 

### 1. f. Is bubbling oraveraging ofanytype allowed? No. g. Ifthere is a redesignation ofthe AQCR to attainment, will this change the emissions limitation in the rule? N/ACALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD



### SIP APPROVABILITY CHECKLIST--ENFORCEABILITY

- 

### PAGE 2

COMPLIANCE DATES a. What is compliance date? Rule 1610 is a voluntary rule and does not have compliance dates in itself, butdoes requirethat an MSERC Application, a Scrapping Plan, and a Compliance Plan (forcreditsto be used forcompliance with Regulation XI and Regulation XIII rules) be submitted within time constraints. The compliance dates ofthe applicable prerequisite Regulation XI rulesforwhich credits are generated applytothe submittal date ofa Scrapping Plan. See Sections (c)(3), (c~(4), (d), (e)(2), (e)(4), (h)m. (i)(5). (k)(1), & (l)(7) [Rule 1610 1. b. What is attainment date? Nitrogen dioxide 12/31/1995 Carbon monoxide 12/31/2000 Ozone 12/31/2010 TSP 12/31/2006 Sulfurdioxide Attained SPECIFICITYOF CONDUCT a. Whattest method is required? NotApplicable. b. What is the averaging time in the compliance test method? NotApplicable. c. Is a compliance calculation orevaluation required? Yes. A calculation methodology is given fordetermining the Mobile Source Emission Reduction Credits perscrapped vehicle. See Section (h) [Rule 1610 1. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE a. What is District authority for rulemaking? See Board amendment Resolution. b. What methods/rules are incorporated in the rule? No new methods/ruleswere incorporated into this amendment.CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD



### SIP APPROVABILITY CHECKLIST--ENFORCEABILITY

- 

### PAGE 3

5. RECORDKEEPING a. What records 

### are required to determine compliance? See 

### Sections (j). (k), and (I) [Rule 1610 1. b. Whatform or units mustthe records be kept? See Sections (c)(4). (h), (i)(3,4), & (l)(1) [Rule 1610 1. c. On whattime basis mustthe records be kept? See Sections (i)(1,2,6,7), (k)(1,5), & (I)(8) [Rule 1610 1. d. Does the rule affirmatively require thatthe records be kept? Yes. See Sections (i) and (k) [Rule 1610 1. EXEMPTIONS a. Are any exemptions allowed? N/A b. What is the criteriaforapplication? N/A MALFUNCTION PROVISIONS N/A (ARBFORM

- 6/93)
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

March 26, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

132830 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

CAROLYN SUE LOVELACE, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 132830 

 COA: 269776 

Oscoda CC: 04-003853-NO 

GARLAND GOLF COURSE,

Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 16, 2006 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

t0319 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

March 26, 2007 

 Clerk
- fplr2258-1
- fplr2258-2
- fplr2258-3
- fplr2258-4
- fplr2258-5
- fplr2258-6
- fplr2258-7
- fplr2258-8
- fplr2258-9
- fplr2258-10
- fplr2258-11
- fplr2258-12
- fplr2258-13
- fplr2258-14
- fplr2258-15
- fplr2258-16
- fplr2258-17
§ 520.606 Diclazuril. ( a ) *Specifications.* Each 100 grams (g) of pellets contain 1.56 g diclazuril.
( b ) *Sponsor.* See No. 000061 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.
( c ) *Conditions of use in horses* — ( 1 ) *Amount.* Administer 1 milligram (mg) per kilogram (0.45 mg per pound) of body weight in the daily grain ration for 28 days.
( 2 ) *Indications for use.* For the treatment of equine protozoal myeloencephalitis (EPM) caused by *Sarcocystis neurona.*
( 3 ) *Limitations.* Do not use in horses intended for human consumption. Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.
[72 FR 20943, Apr. 27, 2007]
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

 

I, Thomas J. Shaw, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Retractable Technologies, Inc.;

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement ofa 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 includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

 

4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the small business issuer 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 small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosurecontrols 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; 

 

c) Disclosed in this report any changes in the small business issuer’s internal controlsover financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer’s fourth quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the small business issuer’s internal controls over financial reporting; and 

 

5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer’s auditors andthe audit committee of the small business issuer’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 adverselyaffect the small business issuer’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 small business issuer’s internal controls overfinancial reporting. 

 

Date: March 29, 2004
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           1,164
<SECURITIES>                                    24,796
<RECEIVABLES>                                   19,757
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (920)
<INVENTORY>                                     11,090
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                59,465
<PP&E>                                          18,618
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (6,492)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  72,132
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           17,752
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            16
<OTHER-SE>                                      52,733
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    72,132
<SALES>                                        146,100
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               146,100
<CGS>                                          127,309
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  127,309
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 8,345
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 214
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 11,243
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,086
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,157
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,157
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.11
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>      5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information
extracted from unaudited financial statements for the
nine month period ending September 30, 1997 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements
</LEGEND>
<CIK>          0000813812
<NAME>         RIVERSIDE PARK ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
<MULTIPLIER>   1
<CURRENCY>     U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                          JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                            SEP-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                   1
<CASH>                                    1,832,048
<SECURITIES>                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     0
<ALLOWANCES>                                      0
<INVENTORY>                                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  0
<PP&E>                                   73,074,444
<DEPRECIATION>                          (31,078,919)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           45,841,756
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             0
<BONDS>                                           0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<COMMON>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                 (191,393)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             45,841,756
<SALES>                                           0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                          8,157,838
<CGS>                                             0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                          3,303,210
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        2,948,144
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (588,282)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (588,282)
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                               (588,282)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                             (1,008.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                             (1,008.19)
        


</TABLE>
§ 582.1742 Sodium carbonate. ( a ) *Product.* Sodium carbonate.
( b ) *Conditions of use.* This substance is generally recognized as safe when used in accordance with good manufacturing or feeding practice.