alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
March 31, 2015 

The Honorable Anthony R. Foxx 

Secretary of Transportation 

US Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

The Honorable John F. Kerry 

Secretary of State 

US Department of State 

2201 C Street NW 

Washington, DC 20520 

Secretaries Foxx and Kerry, as well as Members of the Minnesota Congressional Delegation: 

BRAINEJU> 

www.ci.brainerd.mn.us 

I am writing today to enlist your help in addressing the unfair airline industry practices that emanate from the 

Persian Gulf. While Brainerd Minnesota may be a great distance from Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, we are 

nonetheless concerned for what it means if a competitive balance is not brought back to Open Skies agreements 

with the governments of these two Gulf neighbors. 

Since 2004, Qatar and UAE have poured $42 billion in excessive subsidies and other benefits into three stateowned carriers: Qatar Airways, Etihad Airways and Emirate Airline. Such unfair subsidies are counter to the basis 

of Open Skies policy, and specifically out of bounds of the agreements that the two countries signed a decade ago. 

Such massive subsidies truly provide disproportionate advantages to the Gulf airlines as they reportedly look to 

expand service into the U.S. market. This expansion would come at a terrible expense of American jobs. 

According to the Partnership for Open and Fair Skies, the loss of jobs would be over 800 for every international 

roundtrip lost or forgone by a U.S. carrier. 

The US airlines have been excellent partners to us in the upper Midwest. The Brainerd Lakes Regional Airport is 

served by Delta and others who provide an invaluable service bringing many individuals to our Brainerd Lakes 

area; a major tourist destination. The Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport is home to a major Delta hub 

that serves as the major airport for six neighboring states. 

I honestly believe that the U.S. airlines and the 11 million workers deserve an opportunity to compete on a level 

playing field with others in the marketplace. Everyone should be able to compete in that marketplace. I hope 

you'll agree with me that there needs to be fair competition without a few airlines receiving such a huge 

subsidized economic advantage. 

We need to bring the governments of Qatar and UAE back to the table to address the significant subsidies that are 

distorting the current market. We need your assistance to help give our U.S. carriers the fairness they deserve to 

compete with any other airline in the world. 

Thank you for your time and consideration. 

Sincerely, 

City of Brainerd 1 1 . 1 ~ 

&~,;:~ 

fa'~; E. Wallin, Mayor 

City of Brainerd, 501 Laurel Street, Brainerd, MN 56401 218-828-2307
Editorial Note on Part 882
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 882 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 882.5550 Central nervous system fluid shunt and components. ( a ) *Identification.* A central nervous system fluid shunt is a device or combination of devices used to divert fluid from the brain or other part of the central nervous system to an internal delivery site or an external receptacle for the purpose of relieving elevated intracranial pressure or fluid volume (e.g., due to hydrocephalus). Components of a central nervous system shunt include catheters, valved catheters, valves, connectors, and other accessory components intended to facilitate use of the shunt or evaluation of a patient with a shunt.
( b ) *Classification.* Class II (performance standards).
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 29, 2019

No. 04-19-00442-CV

ECO-STIM ENERGY SOLUTION, INC.,

Appellant

v.

VP SALES & COMPANY, L.P.,

Appellee

From the 79th Judicial District Court, Jim Wells County, Texas

Trial Court No. 18-09-58741-CV

Honorable Richard C. Terrell, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellant has filed proof it has paid the fees due to the Jim Wells County District Clerk 

for preparation and filing of the clerk’s record. We therefore order R. David Guerrero to file the 

clerk’s record in this appeal by August 19, 2019. 

_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 29th day of July, 2019.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
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 Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [TA-W-71,209]

Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated in response to a petition filed on June 15, 2009, by a company official on behalf of workers of A.J. Oster, LLC, Allentown, Pennsylvania.

The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Accordingly, the investigation has been terminated.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 30th day of June 2009.

Linda G. Poole,

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. E9-18056 Filed 7-28-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
Opinion filed September 17, 2015

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals 

___________

No. 11-15-00185-CR

___________

CHRISTOPHER BLEU CUMPTON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 350th District Court

Taylor County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 11427-D

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Christopher Bleu Cumpton, Appellant, has filed a motion to dismiss his

appeal. In the motion, Appellant requests that this court “withdraw [his] notice of 

appeal and dismiss this appeal.” The motion is signed by both Appellant and his

counsel in accordance with TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2.

The motion is granted, and the appeal is dismissed. 

September 17, 2015 PER CURIAM

Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

Willson, J., and Bailey, J.
427 A.2d 1226

#### Commonwealth v. Kane, Appellant.

Submitted August 28, 1979.

John Halley, for appellant;

Robert L. Eberhardt, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Before VAN der VOORT, LARSEN and LAVELLE, JJ.*

*

 Justice Rolf Larsen of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, and Judge John E. Lavelle of the Court of Common Pleas of Schuylkill County, Pennsylvania, are sitting by designation.

Order affirmed.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8096 

To amend the Commodity Exchange Act to prohibit trading of water and 

water rights for future delivery, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 19, 2024 

Mr. KHANNA (for himself, Ms. TLAIB, Ms. BUSH, Mr. CARSON, Ms. OCASIOCORTEZ, Ms. ADAMS, Ms. OMAR, Mr. GARCI ́A of Illinois, Mrs. WATSON

COLEMAN, Ms. SCHAKOWSKY, Mrs. RAMIREZ, Ms. LEE of California, Ms. 

NORTON, Mr. BOWMAN, Mrs. HAYES, and Mr. POCAN) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To amend the Commodity Exchange Act to prohibit trading 

of water and water rights for future delivery, and for 

other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Future of Water Act 

5 of 2024’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 8096 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION OF TRADING IN WATER AND WATER 

2 RIGHTS FOR FUTURE DELIVERY. 

3 (a) COMMODITY EXCHANGE ACT.—Section 1a(9) of 

4 the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 1a(9)) is amend5 ed— 

6 (1) by striking ‘‘(7 U.S.C. 13–1)) and’’ and in7 serting ‘‘(7 U.S.C. 13–1)),’’; 

8 (2) by inserting ‘‘water or water rights (or any 

9 index, measure, value, or data related to water or 

10 water rights), and’’ after ‘‘receipts), and’’; and 

11 (3) by striking ‘‘receipts) in which’’ and insert12 ing ‘‘receipts, and water or water rights, or any 

13 index, measure, value, or data related to water or 

14 water rights) in which’’. 

15 (b) PUBLIC LAW 85–839.—The first section of Pub16 lic Law 85–839 (7 U.S.C. 13–1) is amended in the first 

17 sentence of subsection (a)— 

18 (1) by inserting ‘‘water or water rights (or any 

19 index, measure, value, or data related to water or 

20 water rights),’’ after ‘‘sale of’’; and 

21 (2) by striking ‘‘receipts)’’ and inserting ‘‘re22 ceipts),’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
#### SIDNEY WEINBURG v. THE UNITED STATES

[No. 42788]

[87 C. Cls. 497; 306 U. S. 661]

decided November 14, 1938;

Petition for writ of certiorari *denied,*by the Supreme Court April 17, 1939.
NO. 07-06-0176-CR 07-06-0177-CR IN THE COUR

T OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVEN TH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO PANEL A MAY 11, 2006

______________________________ ALEISTER CARLTON BULL, APPELLANT

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, A PPELLEE

_________________________________ FROM THE 181 ST DISTRIC T COURT O F POTT ER COUNTY; NO. 36932-B, 36933 -B; HONOR ABLE JOHN B. BOARD, JUD GE

_______________________________ Before REAVIS and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. ORDER ON ABA

TEMENT AND REMAND Appellant

Aleister Carlton B ull, acti ng p ro s e, has appealed hi s convic tion and sentence. A copy of a not ice of appeal was filed wi th th is Court o n May 1, 2006 . The clerk’s record and r

eporter’s r

ecord ha v e not been filed. Pen ding before this Court is a requestfrom the appellant r equesting the Court to appo int an attor n ey torepre sent hi m. In the interest of

judicial efficiency we abate this appeal and remand the caus e to the trial courtto conduct a hearing and determ ine whether appell ant i s indigent and entitled to appointment of counsel.2

Should the tri al court determine that appellant is indigent, then the trial court shall take such measures a s may be neces sary to as sure appellant effective assi stance of counsel, including the appointment of counsel. If couns el is appointe d, the name, address, telephone number, and state bar number of said counsel s hall be incl uded in the order appointing counsel. Finally, the trial cour t shall exe cute f indings of f act, conc lusio ns oflaw, and such orders as the court may enter regar

ding the aforementi oned issues and cause its findings and conclusions to be i ncluded in a supplemen tal clerk's record to be filed in this court no

later than M onday, June 12, 2006.

Per Curiam Do not publish

.
**Exhibit
      32.01**








**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**


**REQUIRED
      BY RULE 13a-14(b) or RULE 15d-14(b)**


**AND
      SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT**


**OF
      2002, 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**








In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Williams Controls, Inc (the "Company")
      on Form 10-Q for the period ended June
      30,
      2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
      (the "Report"), I, Patrick W. Cavanagh, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
      certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of the
                Company.








/s/
      PATRICK W. CAVANAGH


Patrick
      W. Cavanagh


Chief
      Executive Officer


Williams
      Controls, Inc.


August
      10, 2007
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.                  

###### Securities and Exchange Commission

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities and Exchange Commission will hold a Closed Meeting on Thursday, March 11, 2010 at 2 p.m.

Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the Closed Meeting. Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be present.

The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (7), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(3), (5), (7), 9(ii) and (10), permit consideration of the scheduled matters at the Closed Meeting.

                    Commissioner Casey, as duty officer, voted to consider the items listed for the Closed Meeting in a closed session.                          ( print page 10851)    

The subject matter of the Closed Meeting scheduled for Thursday, March 11, 2010 will be: Formal order of investigation; institution and settlement of injunctive actions; institution and settlement of administrative proceedings; an adjudicatory matter; and other matters relating to enforcement proceedings.

At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in the scheduling of meeting items.

For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed, please contact: The Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-5400.

Dated: March 4, 2010.

Elizabeth M. Murphy, 

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2010-5053 Filed 3-5-10; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 17

- 4927

_____________________________
M OROCCO L AVAN L EWIS , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Bay County

. Brantley S. Clark
, Jr., Judge

. October 4, 2018

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
R OWE , K ELSEY , and M.K. T HOMAS , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Joel Arnold, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee
, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Holly N. Simcox, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                      5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                                      <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   6-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         Sep-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                            Oct-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                              Mar-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                     1
<CASH>                                          1,290
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  11,662
<ALLOWANCES>                                      328
<INVENTORY>                                    10,004
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               30,679
<PP&E>                                         28,460
<DEPRECIATION>                                  7,640
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 63,258
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          11,079
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         1
<COMMON>                                          185
<OTHER-SE>                                     26,665
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   63,258
<SALES>                                        31,566
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               31,565
<CGS>                                          22,006
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  26,554
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  365
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                576
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 4,071
<INCOME-TAX>                                    1,563
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             2,508
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                    2,508
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    0.12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.12
        



</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 23.3

               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
   
We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption "Experts" and 
"Selected Financial Data" and to the use of our report dated  December 3, 1997,
except for paragraph 3 of Note 6 and paragraph 12 of Note 10,  as to which the
date is January 2, 1998 and Note 15, as to which the date is December 10, 1998,
included in Amendment No. 1 to the  Registration Statement (Form S-1 No.
333-58819) and related Prospectus of  Intracel Corporation for the registration
of shares of its common stock.

Seattle, Washington
December 30, 1998

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The foregoing consent is in the form that will be signed upon the completion of
the reverse stock split described in paragraph 17 of Note 14 to the financial 
statements.
                                     
                                                 ERNST & YOUNG LLP
Seattle, Washington
December 30, 1998
COMPARISON OF PELLETIZING MACHINES

• A comparison of Pelletizing machines is limited to the Traveling Grate (Danieli, 

Outokumpu or Aker Kvaerner) and the Grate/Kiln (Metso or Kobelco). Both 

machines are similar in production capability and capital costs.

• The operating cost for a Traveling Grate is approximately 34% cheaper for the 

following reasons:

o Energy consumption is lower by approximately 33% (reason is single 

machine with fixed bed resulting in less leakage). Economic benefit is lower 

costs. Additional benefit is that low-NOx burners were not available for the 

single large burner on the kiln but are available for straight-grate system. 

o Maintenance is approximately 14% lower (reason is fixed refractory and grate 

bar life above five years). Benefit is lower costs and higher availability by 6%; 

and

o Manhours per ton are lower (reason is less equipment and better controls). 

Benefit is lower costs.

• The quality of the product from the Traveling Grate is better than a Grate Kiln for DRI 

production for four reasons:

o Low silica – magnetite green ball with 1% limestone will require complete 

calcination/oxidation prior to induration to faciliate achieving overall pellet 

quality. 

o Lower % minus 1/4 inch B.T. (reason is fixed bed – no transfers);

o Higher porosity thus higher reducibility (reason is no compaction from the 

rolling action in kiln); and 

o The Traveling Grate has greater turndown capability because it does not have 

the refractory lined kiln. Execution time for the Traveling Grate is dictated by 

the Process Fans, not a kiln. A key factor for Phase I to Phase II transition.

• The overall conclusion is the Traveling Grate is the best cost-effective and quality 

option for producing DRI/HBI feedstock.
Comparison of Pelletizing Machines @ 2.4 mtpa 

 Traveling Grate Grate/Kiln 

Manufacturers Danieli & others Metso & Kolbelco 

 

Design Capacity available, mtpa 

 *Minimum 2.0 2.0 

 *Maximum 6.5 6.0 

 

Capital Costs, $/annual ton $40 $40 

Cash Operating Costs, % 100% 134% 

Availability, % 94% 89% 

Pellet Quality 

 *Tumble Index, + 1⁄4, % 96% 95% 

 *Porosity, % 32% 28% 

 

Facts 

 

Installation 

 *Installed Capacity, mtpa 198 127 

 *Operating Capacity, % 86% 61% 

 *DRI Feedstock, % 65% 14% 

 *Capacity Shutdown, % 14% 49% 

 *Under Construction, mtpa 26 --- 

 

Operating Cost, $/ton 

 *Bentonite, #/t 20 20 

 *Electrical, kwh/t 29 25 

 *Natural Gas, mmbtu/t 0.25 0.36 

 *Maintenance, % 100% 114% 

 *Labor, mhrs/t 0.047 0.066 

 

Binder Flexibility Yes Yes 

Maximum Turndown, % 80% 40% 

Project Execution, months 18 24 

Start-Up Duration, months 10 10
<Page>

                                                                          [LOGO]


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the use in this Post-Effective Amendment No. 7 to the
registration statement on Form N-4 (No. 333-20343) (the "Registration
Statement") of our report dated February 13, 2003, relating to the financial
statements of First Fortis Life Insurance Company, which appears in such
Registration Statement. We also consent to the reference to us under the heading
"Independent Accountants" in such Registration Statement.

PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP
Minneapolis, Minnesota
April 7, 2003
#### People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Tommie Lee Mitchell (Impleaded), Defendant-Appellant.

Gen. No. 53,047.

First District, Second Division.

February 18, 1969.

Paul J. Galanti, of Chicago, for appellant; John J. Stamos, State’s Attorney of Cook County, of Chicago (Elmer C. Kissane and James S. Veldman, Assistant State’s Attorneys, of counsel), for appellee.

Opinion by

PRESIDING JUSTICE LYONS.

Not to be published in full.
§ 1.195-2 Technical termination of a partnership. ( a ) *In general.* If a partnership that has elected to amortize start-up expenditures under section 195(b) and § 1.195-1 terminates in a transaction (or a series of transactions) described in section 708(b)(1)(B) or § 1.708-1(b)(2), the termination shall not be treated as resulting in a disposition of the partnership's trade or business for purposes of section 195(b)(2). See § 1.708-1(b)(6) for rules concerning the treatment of these start-up expenditures by the new partnership.
( b ) *Effective/applicability date.* This section applies to a technical termination of a partnership under section 708(b)(1)(B) that occurs on or after December 9, 2013.
[T.D. 9681, 79 FR 42679, July 23, 2014]