alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000813621
<NAME>                        AMCOL International Corporation
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     USD
       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1.00
<CASH>                                         5,977
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  106,798
<ALLOWANCES>                                   4,041
<INVENTORY>                                    54,068
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               171,329
<PP&E>                                         319,064
<DEPRECIATION>                                 149,354
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 363,718
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          79,942
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       320
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   363,718
<SALES>                                        384,596
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               384,596
<CGS>                                          303,874
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  353,847
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               126
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             5,796
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                24,827
<INCOME-TAX>                                   8,938
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            15,889
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   15,889
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  .51
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .50
        


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 40 (Tuesday, March 2, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 9414]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-4348]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION


Farm Credit Administration Board; Sunshine Act; Regular Meeting

AGENCY: Farm Credit Administration.
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the Government in the 
Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b(e)(3)), of the regular meeting of the Farm 
Credit Administration Board (Board).

DATE AND TIME: The regular meeting of the Board will be held at the 
offices of the Farm Credit Administration in McLean, Virginia, on March 
11, 2010, from 9 a.m. until such time as the Board concludes its 
business.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roland E. Smith, Secretary to the Farm 
Credit Administration Board, (703) 883-4009, TTY (703) 883-4056.

ADDRESSES: Farm Credit Administration, 1501 Farm Credit Drive, McLean, 
Virginia 22102-5090.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This meeting of the Board will be open to 
the public (limited space available). In order to increase the 
accessibility to Board meetings, persons requiring assistance should 
make arrangements in advance. The matters to be considered at the 
meeting are:

Open Session

A. Approval of Minutes

<bullet> February 24, 2010

B. New Business

<bullet> Director Elections--Final Rule

C. Reports

<bullet> Office of Management Services Quarterly Report

    Dated: February 25, 2010.
Roland E. Smith,
Secretary, Farm Credit Administration Board.
[FR Doc. 2010-4348 Filed 2-26-10; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6705-01-P
#### Donald I. Rudder *v.*Town Planning Commission of the Town of Canton

*Paul W. Orth,*for the appellant (plaintiff).

*Charles W. Page,*for the appellee (defendant).

Argued October 7

decided October 7, 1969

The motion by the plaintiff for this court to set aside the judgment against him in the appeal from the Court of Common Pleas in Hartford County is denied.
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Gerardo Barrientos v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01-18-00626-CR

Trial court case number: 1548730

Trial court: 248th District Court of Harris County

Appellant, Gerardo Barrientos, has filed a letter with this Court, which we construe 

as a motion requesting certain police reports. The record on appeal consists of the clerk’s 

record and, if necessary to the appeal, the reporter’s record. TEX. R. APP. P. 34.1. The 

reporter’s record consists of, among other things, any of the exhibits in the proceeding. 

TEX. R. APP. P. 34.6(a)(1). An appellate court is generally limited to reviewing only the 

evidence that was before the trial court. See Amador v. State, 221 S.W.3d 666, 676–77 

(Tex. Crim. App. 2007); see also TEX. R. APP. P. 34.6(d), (e). Our review of the record 

indicates that no police report was before the trial court. Accordingly, we deny appellant’s 

motion.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Julie Countiss

 Acting individually Acting for the Court

Date: ___January 28, 2020_____
# C_2017063EN.01002301.xml

| 27.2.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 63/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.2.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 63/23

---

Judgment of the General Court of 13 January 2017 — Deza v ECHA

(Case T-189/14) (1)

1

((Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents held by the ECHA containing information submitted by an undertaking in connection with its application for authorisation to use di-(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP) - Decision to disclose certain information considered confidential by the applicant - Exception relating to the protection of commercial interests - Concept of private life - Right to property - Obligation to state reasons))

(2017/C 063/31)

Language of the case: Czech

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Deza, a.s. (Valašské Meziříčí, Czech Republic) (represented by P. Dejl, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) (represented initially by A. Iber, T. Zbihlej and M. Heikkilä, acting as Agents, and subsequently by M. Heikkilä, C. Buchanan and W. Broere, acting as Agents, and by M. Mašková, lawyer)

Defendant:

Interveners in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by F. Clotuche-Duvieusart, P. Ondrůšek and K. Talabér-Ritz, acting as Agents), and ClientEarth (London, United Kingdom), European Environmental Bureau (EEB) (Brussels, Belgium), Vereniging Health Care Without Harm Europe (Rijswijk, Netherlands) (represented by B. Kloostra, lawyer)

Interveners in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of ECHA’s decisions of 24 January 2014 concerning the disclosure of certain information submitted by the applicant in the course of the procedure relating to the application for authorisation to use di-(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP).

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1)

Dismisses the action;

| 2) | Orders Deza, a.s., in addition to bearing its own costs, to pay those incurred by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), including those relating to the application for interim measures; |
| --- | --- |

2)

Orders Deza, a.s., in addition to bearing its own costs, to pay those incurred by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), including those relating to the application for interim measures;

| 3) | Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs; |
| --- | --- |

3)

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs;

| 4) | Orders ClientEarth, European Environmental Bureau (EEB) and Vereniging Health Care Without Harm Europe to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

4)

Orders ClientEarth, European Environmental Bureau (EEB) and Vereniging Health Care Without Harm Europe to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 194, 24.6.2014.

1

---
§ 582.6386 Isopropyl citrate. ( a ) *Product.* Isopropyl citrate.
( b ) *Tolerance.* This substance is generally recognized as safe for use at a level not exceeding 0.02 percent in accordance with good manufacturing or feeding practice.
# C_2014421EN.01002101.xml

| 24.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 421/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 421/21

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Latvia) lodged on 18 September 2014 — Valsts ieņēmumu dienests v SIA ‘Veloserviss’

(Case C-427/14)

2014/C 421/30

Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Referring court

Augstākā tiesa

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Valsts ieņēmumu dienests

Applicant:

Defendant: SIA ‘Veloserviss’

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

Should Article 78(3) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 (1) of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code be interpreted as meaning that the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations limits the possibility of undertaking for a second time a post-clearance examination and revising the results of the first post-clearance examination?

1

May the national law of a Member State establish the procedure for the undertaking of post-clearance examinations provided for in Article 78(3) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992, establishing the Community Customs Code, and limits on the revision of the results of those examinations?

Should Article 78(3) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992, establishing the Community Customs Code, be interpreted as meaning that national legislation may legitimately contain limitations on the revision of the results of a first post-clearance examination, if information is received indicating that the provisions governing the customs procedure were applied on the basis of incorrect and incomplete information, a matter which was not known at the time of adopting the decision on the first post-clearance examination?

---

(1)  OJ 1992 L 302, p. 1.

1

---
§ 526.1590 Novobiocin. ( a ) *Specifications.* Each single-dose, 10-milliliter syringe contains: ( 1 ) 150 milligrams (mg) of novobiocin equivalents as sodium novobiocin, or
( 2 ) 400 mg of novobiocin equivalents as sodium novobiocin.
( b ) *Sponsor.* See No. 054771 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.
( c ) *Related tolerances.* See § 556.460 of this chapter.
( d ) *Conditions of use for syringe described in paragraph (a)(1) of this section in lactating cows* — ( 1 ) Amount . Infuse the contents of one syringe (equivalent to 150 mg novobiocin) into each infected quarter after milking. Repeat treatment once after 24 hours. Do not milk for at least 6 hours after treatment.
( 2 ) *Indications for use.* For the treatment of mastitis caused by susceptible strains of *Staphylococcus aureus* in lactating cows.
( 3 ) *Limitations.* Milk taken from treated animals within 72 hours (6 milkings) after latest treatment should not be used for food. Do not slaughter treated animals for food for 15 days following latest treatment. Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.
( e ) *Conditions of use for syringe described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section in dry cows* — ( 1 ) Amount . Infuse the contents of one syringe (equivalent to 400 mg novobiocin) into each quarter at the time of drying off.
( 2 ) *Indications for use.* For the treatment of mastitis caused by susceptible strains of *Staphylococcus aureus* and *Streptococcus agalactiae* in dry cows.
( 3 ) *Limitations.* For udder installation for the treatment of mastitis in dry cows only. Infuse each quarter at the time of drying off, but not less than 30 days prior to calving. Do not slaughter treated animals for food for 30 days following udder infusion.
[86 FR 13187, Mar. 8, 2021]
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

ALEXIS CHAVEZ-ARUJAS,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 11-10153

D.C. No. 4:10-cr-01296-CKJ-BPV-1

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Cindy K. Jorgenson, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted July 17, 2012** 

Before: SCHROEDER, THOMAS and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.

Alexis Chavez-Arujas appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 33-month

sentence for being an illegal alien found in the United States after having been

previously removed, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Pursuant to Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Chavez-Arujas’s counsel has filed a brief stating

FILED

JUL 19 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
 We decline to review Chavez-Arujas’s ineffective assistance of counsel

1

claim because the record is not sufficiently developed to permit review on direct

appeal. See United States v. Leasure, 319 F.3d 1092, 1099 (9th Cir. 2003).

2 11-10153

there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of

record. We have provided the appellant with the opportunity to file a pro se

supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been

filed.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.

75, 80-81 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal. We

1

dismiss in light of the valid appeal waiver. See United States v. Nguyen, 235 F.3d

1179, 1182 (9th Cir. 2000).

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

DISMISSED.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

TENZEE LAMA

- SHERPA,

Petitioner,

v.

JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 14

- 71198

Agency No. A200

- 941

- 944

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Argued and Submitted July 11, 2017 San Francisco, California

Before: BEA and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges, and LYNN, ** Chief District Judge.

T he Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA” ) denied Petitioner Tenzee Lama

Sherpa’s motion to reopen immigration proceedings

. Lama

- Sherpa petitions this

Court for review of the denial by the BIA , which held that Lama

- Sherpa did not

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The Honorable Barbara M. G. Lynn, Chief United States District Judge for the Northern District of Texas, sitting by designation. 

# FILED

SEP 7 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2

satisfy his burden to show the new evidence would likely change the result in his

case. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny the petition.

We review the BIA’s decision to deny a motion to reopen for abuse of

discretion. Fernandez v. Gonzales , 439 F.3d 592 , 601 (9th Cir. 2006). This Court

defers to t he BIA’s decision to deny reopening unless it is “arbitrary, irrational, or

contrary to law.” Tou

fighi v. Mukasey , 538 F.3d 988, 992 (9th Cir. 2008). Aliens

who seek to reopen proceedings “bear a ‘ heavy burden ’ of proving that if

proceedings were reopened, the new evidence would likely change the result.”

Young Sun Shin v. Mukasey , 547 F.3d 1019, 1025 (9th Cir. 2008).

Lama

- Sherpa argues an attack on his father by the Maoists is evidence of

changed country conditions in N epal that would lead to a different result in his

case

. However, “an individual who can relocate safely within his home country

ordinarily cannot qualify for asylum.” Gonzalez

- Hernandez v. Ashcroft , 336 F.3d

995 , 999 (9th Cir. 2003) ( quoting INS v. Ventura , 537 U.S. 12, 18 (2002) ). The

threats made against Lama

- Sherpa and the physical violence against his father

occurred in the city of Jiri. Lama

- Sherpa left Jiri for Kathmandu, where no

violence or threat of violence was made against him. Lama

- Sherpa’s pare nts also

moved to and lived in Kathmandu for more than seven years, and they faced no

violence or threat of violence there.3

Lama

- Sherpa provides no evidence that he could not reside unharmed in

Kathmandu or elsewhere in Nepal

, other than Jiri. There is also no evidence

showing a material change in conditions in Nepal since the Immigration Judge’s

decision. Therefore, Lama

- Sherpa did not meet his burden of proof that the new

evidence would change the result in his case , a necessary prerequisite to reopeni ng

.

PETITION DENIED.
#### § 82.1707 D&C Yellow No. 7.

The color additive D&C Yellow No. 7 shall conform in identity and specifications to the requirements of § 74.1707(a)(1) and (b) of this chapter. D&C Yellow No. 7 is restricted to use in externally applied drugs and cosmetics.
§ 507.22 Equipment and utensils. ( a ) The following apply to plant equipment and utensils used in manufacturing, processing, packing, and holding animal food: ( 1 ) All plant equipment and utensils, including equipment and utensils that do not come in contact with animal food, must be designed and constructed of such material and workmanship to be adequately cleanable, and must be properly maintained;
( 2 ) Equipment and utensils must be designed, constructed, and used appropriately to avoid the adulteration of animal food with non-food grade lubricants, fuel, metal fragments, contaminated water, or any other contaminants;
( 3 ) Equipment must be installed so as to facilitate the cleaning and maintenance of the equipment and adjacent spaces;
( 4 ) Animal food-contact surfaces must be: ( i ) Made of materials that withstand the environment of their use and the action of animal food, and, if applicable, the action of cleaning compounds, cleaning procedures, and sanitizing agents;
( ii ) Made of nontoxic materials; and
( iii ) Maintained to protect animal food from being contaminated.
( b ) Holding, conveying, manufacturing, and processing systems, including gravimetric, pneumatic, closed, and automated systems, must be designed, constructed, and maintained in a way to protect against the contamination of animal food.
( c ) Each freezer and cold storage compartment used to hold animal food must be fitted with an accurate temperature-measuring device.
( d ) Instruments and controls used for measuring, regulating, or recording temperatures, pH, aw, or other conditions that control or prevent the growth of undesirable microorganisms in animal food must be accurate, precise, adequately maintained, and adequate in number for their designated uses.
( e ) Compressed air or other gases mechanically introduced into animal food or used to clean animal food-contact surfaces or equipment must be used in such a way to protect against the contamination of animal food.
§ 861.5 Statement of policy. In carrying out its duties under this section, the Food and Drug Administration will, to the maximum extent practical: ( a ) Use personnel, facilities, and other technical support available in other Federal agencies;
( b ) Consult with other Federal agencies concerned with standard setting and other nationally or internationally recognized standard-setting entities; and
( c ) Invite participation, through conferences, workshops, or other means, by representatives of scientific, professional, industry, or consumer organizations who can make a significant contribution.
§ 520.90c Ampicillin boluses. ( a ) *Specifications.* Each bolus contains ampicillin trihydrate equivalent to 400 milligrams of ampicillin.
( b ) *Sponsor.* See No. 054771 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.
( c ) *Related tolerances.* See § 556.40 of this chapter.
( d ) *Conditions of use in nonruminating calves* — ( 1 ) *Amount.* 5 milligrams per pound of body weight twice daily not to exceed 4 days.
( 2 ) *Indications for use.* Oral treatment of bacterial enteritis (colibacillosis) caused by *E. coli.*
( 3 ) *Limitations.* Treated calves must not be slaughtered for food during treatment and for 7 days after the last treatment. Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.
[57 FR 37322, Aug. 18, 1992, as amended at 58 FR 61016, Nov. 19, 1993; 60 FR 55659, Nov. 2, 1995; 79 FR 28818, May 20, 2014. Redesignated and amended at 85 FR 18118, Apr. 1, 2020]
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 CEC  Entertainment,  Inc. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the  quarter  ended June 27, 2004 as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof (the  "Report"),  the
undersigned  certifies,  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/ Christopher D. Morris
                                            ------------------------------
                                            Christopher D. Morris
                                            Chief Financial Officer
                                            August 5, 2004



A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to CEC  Entertainment,  Inc. and will be retained by CEC Entertainment,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities  and Exchange  Commission or its staff upon
request.
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

APR 10, 2009

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 08-16297

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 02-00122-CR-T-24-EAJ

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RONALD RAY LANGDON,

Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

_________________________

(April 10, 2009)

Before BIRCH, PRYOR and COX, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

James W. Smith, III, appointed counsel for Ronald Ray Langdon, has filed a
motion to withdraw on appeal, supported by a brief prepared pursuant to Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent

review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of

the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals

no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the

district court’s order denying Langdon’s motion for relief under 18 U.S.C.

§ 3582(c)(2) is AFFIRMED.

2
# C_2014112EN.01002402.xml

| 14.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 112/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 112/24

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Duisburg (Germany) lodged on 20 January 2014 — Elfriede Stermann, Hans Gerd Stermann v Zurich Deutscher Herold Lebensversicherung AG

(Case C-27/14)

2014/C 112/30

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Landgericht Duisburg

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Elfriede Stermann, Hans Gerd Stermann

Applicants:

Defendant: Zurich Deutscher Herold Lebensversicherung AG

Defendant:

This Case was removed from the Register of the Court by Order of the Court of 14 February 2014.

---