alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential.


# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________
THE TURFGRASS GROUP, INC. AND UNIVERSITY OF GEORGI A RESEARCH FOUNDATION, INC.,

Plaintiffs

- Appellants,

v.

CAROLINA FRESH FARMS , INC., CAROLINA FRESH FARMS, L.L.C. , f ormerly known as Carolina Fresh Farms, Inc.
, AND JOHN A. FOGLE, SR., Defendants

- Appellees.

______________________

2014

- 1017

______________________

A ppeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina in No. 5:10

- CV

- 00849, Judge J. Michelle Childs.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

D AMON C. W LODARCZYK , Riley Pope & Laney, LLC, of Columbia, South Carolina, argued for plaintiffs

appellants. Of counsel on the brief was D UFF N OLAN
, Nolan Law Group, PLLC, of Stuttgart, Arizona.R OBERT F. G OINGS , Goings Law Firm, LLC, of Colu mbia, South Carolina, argued for defendants -a ppellees. Of counsel on the brief was C HRISTIAN E. B OESL , Collins & Lacy, P.C., of Columbia, South Carolina.

______________________

T HIS C AUSE having been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM (P ROST
, Chief Judge, N EWMAN and T AR ANTO
, Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED

. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

December 11, 2014 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Date Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk of Court
## Attachment 1 is a current regulation text and associated table that identifies the regulations

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) requests EPA approve

and include in the State Implementation Plan (SIP).

The files composing Attachment 1 are listed below and provided as attachment to this

document.

Name Size Type Last Modified

2001 Submittal File folder

ATT 1 Explantion Table for 2001 and 2002 SIPs.pdf 337KB Adobe Acrobat Document 1/24/2013 4:12 PM

ATT 1 Merged Mark Up for 2001 and 2002 SIPs.pdf 47MB Adobe Acrobat Document 1/24/2013 4:12 PM

2006 Submittal File folder

ATT 1 Explantion Table for Sept 14 2006 SIP submittal.pdf 770KB Adobe Acrobat Document 1/24/2013 4:12 PM

ATT 1 Merged Mark Up for Sept 14 2006 SIP.pdf 64MB Adobe Acrobat Docume nt 1/24/2013 4:11 PM

2008 Submittal File folder

ATT 1 Explantion Table for February 13, 2008 SIP.pdf 175KB Adobe Acrobat Document 1/24/2013 4:12 PM

ATT 1 Mark up for February 13, 2008 SIP.pdf 12MB Adobe Acrobat Document 1/24/2013 4:12 PM

2010 Submi ttal File folder

ATT 1 Docket 511

- 310 CMR 7.25

- 11.pdf 14MB Adobe Acrobat Document 1/24/2013 4:12 PM

ATT 1 Docket 538

- 310 CMR 7.25

- 12.pdf 5,106KB Adobe Acrobat Document 1/24/2013 4:12 PM

ATT 1 Docket 539

- 310 CMR 7.18

- 8.pdf 2,001KB Adobe Acrobat Document 1/24/2013 4:12 PM

ATT 1 Docket 540

- 310 CMR 7.24.pdf 8,998KB Adobe Acrobat Document 1/24/2013 4:12 PM

ATT 1 Explantion Table for June 1, 2010 SIP submittal.pdf 733KB Adobe Acrobat Document 1/24/2013 4:12 PM
IV

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 173

Expressing the sense of the Congress that a postage stamp should be issued

in recognition of the services rendered by this Nation’s volunteer firefighters.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 9, 1996

Mr. FORBES submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred

to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the Congress that a postage stamp

should be issued in recognition of the services rendered

by this Nation’s volunteer firefighters.

Whereas volunteer firefighters, a brotherhood of patriotic

Americans dedicated to saving our communities from the

ravages of fire, place the public health and welfare, and

the security of our homes, schools, and places of worship

ahead of their own personal safety;

Whereas 1998 marks the 350th anniversary of the first volunteer fire department in the United States;

Whereas there are over 800,000 volunteer firefighters serving

in the United States;

Whereas 87 percent of our Nation’s fire service is conducted

by volunteers;
2

•HCON 173 IH

Whereas there are over 24,000 fire departments in the United States that are staffed in whole or in part by volunteers; and

Whereas these professionally trained men and women have

dedicated thousands of hours of their personal time to

advanced training toward the end of safeguarding the

lives and property of others: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that the

3 Citizens’ Stamp Advisory Committee of the United States

4 Postal Service should recommend to the Postmaster Gen5 eral that a postage stamp be issued to commemorate the

6 350th anniversary of the Volunteer Fire Service.

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 28 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 28

 Expressing the sense of Congress that a proposed cross-border fee for 
  vehicles and pedestrians entering the United States from Canada or 
              Mexico is unwise and should not be enacted.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 14, 1995

 Mr. LaFalce (for himself and Mr. de la Garza) submitted the following 
concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and 
                                 Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
 Expressing the sense of Congress that a proposed cross-border fee for 
  vehicles and pedestrians entering the United States from Canada or 
              Mexico is unwise and should not be enacted.

Whereas the President's proposed budget includes a proposal that would levy an 
        entry fee of $3.00 for each vehicle entering the United States and $1.50 
        for each pedestrian entering the United States at border crossings 
        between the United States and the nations of Canada and Mexico;
Whereas imposition of any such fees will have devastating consequences for 
        border communities along both the Western and Southern borders of the 
        United States;
Whereas imposition of any such fees will adversely and seriously affect commerce 
        among the United States, Canada, and Mexico;
Whereas imposition of any such fees violates the spirit of free trade in general 
        and, in particular, the United States-Canada Free Trade Agreement and 
        the North American Free Trade Agreement;
Whereas imposition of any such fees would be, in actuality, an unreasonable and 
        unfair tax on border crossings; and
Whereas imposition of any such fees would be likely to result in the imposition 
        of similar fees on the part of the Canadian and Mexican governments, 
        thus exacerbating the adverse economic impacts noted above: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of Congress that cross-border entry fees or taxes 
on vehicles and/or pedestrians seeking to enter the United States from 
Canada or Mexico, such as those proposed in the President's budget, are 
economically unsound and are likely to result in retaliatory fees or 
taxes on the part of the Canadian and Mexican Governments, and 
therefore such fees should not be imposed by the United States, and the 
President is urged to remove this proposal from his budget 
recommendations.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND> 
         THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
         FORM 10-Q OF BERLITZ INTERNATIONAL, INC. FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED
         SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
         SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>      1,000
       
<S>                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                 SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                       34,831
<SECURITIES>                                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                                48,434
<ALLOWANCES>                                 2,331
<INVENTORY>                                  10,940
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             108,583
<PP&E>                                       58,749
<DEPRECIATION>                               22,962
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               658,855
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        111,088
<BONDS>                                      0
<COMMON>                                     1,003
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        0
<PREFERRED>                                  0
<OTHER-SE>                                   349,817
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 658,855
<SALES>                                      0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             326,561
<CGS>                                        0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                193,870
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             12,925
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           8,265
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              6,974
<INCOME-TAX>                                 5,174
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,646
<DISCONTINUED>                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              0
<CHANGES>                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,646
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                0.17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                0.17
        

</TABLE>
nrP T CF]\ \ UNITE D STATE S O FAMERIC A DEPARTMEN T O FTRANSPORTATIO N OFFIC E O FHEARING S WASHINGTON , D C

TRAVE L GROUP , INC. , D/B/ A REPUBLI C AI RTRAVE L AN D SCO T SPENCE R AIRLIF T GROUP , INC
. AN D RICHAR D BERNAR D Unauthorize dAi r

Transportation , Unfai r an dDeceptiv e Practice s an dUnfai r

Method s o f

Competition , an d Violation s o f

Publi c Charte r

Rule s EXPRES S ON E INTERNATIONAL , INC
. Unfai r an dDeceptiv e Practice s an dUnfai r Method s o f Competition , an dViolation s o f Publi c Charte r

Rule s Enforcemen t

Proceedin g DOT-OST-1995-27 2
formerl y Docke t 4923 3

STATU S REPOR T
Th e Offic e of

th e Assistan t

Genera l Counse l for

Aviatio n Enforcemen t

an d Proceeding s ("Enforcemen t Office") , pursuan t

t o You r Honor' s Marc h 22 , 2006 , Orde r stayin g thi s proceeding , file s thi s report detailin g th e curren t

statu s o f thi s proceedin g an d settlemen t negotiations
. Th e Departmen t

ha s no t rule do n th e outstandin g motion s file db y Respondent s
an doppose db y th e Enforcemen t Offic e i n Ascen dAviatio n Group , Docke t OST-2004

- 17486
.Ther e hav e bee n n o further settlemen t

discussions
. Date : January 29 , 2010
. Respectfull y submitted
.
famuefPodberesky Assistan t Genera l Counse l for Aviatio n Enforcemen t

an dProceeding s Dayto n Lehman , Jr
. Deput y Assistan t

Genera l Counse l for Aviatio n Enforcemen t

an dProceeding s

Willia mJ
. Senio r Trial Attorne y Unite dState s Departmen t o f Transportatio n Offic e o f Aviatio n Enforcemen t

an dProceeding s 120 0 Ne w Jerse y Avenue , S.E
. Roo m96-42 9 Washington , D.C
. 2059 0 TEL : 202-366-934 2 FAX : 202-366-715 2Docke t No
. DOT-OST-1995-27 2 I hereb y certif

y that o n thi s 29t

h day o f January , 2010 , atru e an dcorrec t cop y o f th e foregoin g Statu s Report

was serve din th e followin g manne r t o th e following : Origina l U.S
. Departmen t

o f Transportatio n Docke t Operations , M-3 0 Wes t Buildin g Groun dFloo r Roo mW12-14 0 120 0 Ne w Jerse y Avenue , S.E
. Washington , D.C
. 2059 0 B y Persona l Servic e Th e Honorabl e Ronnie A Yode r Chie f Administrativ e Law Judg e Offic e o f Hearings , M-2 0 U.S
. Departmen t

o f Transportatio n Eas t Buildin g Groun dFloo r Roo mEl2-32 0 Washington , D.C
. 2059 0 TEL : (202 ) 366-214 2 FAX : (202 ) 366-753 6 B y Firs t Clas s Mai l Ascen dAviatio n Group , LL C Ascen dAviatio n Marketin g an dSales , LL C KC P Leasin g an dServices , LL C Sco t Spence r C/O Georg e Spence r 2 4 Eto n Court Bedminster , NJ 0792 1
Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Supplemental Response to the Department's letter of April 8, 2011 and Motion for Confidential Treatment.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Raymond McArthur BEALL, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 02-6601.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted June 13, 2002.

Decided June 19, 2002.

Raymond McArthur Beall, Appellant Pro Se.

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

*669PER CURIAM.

Raymond McArthur Beall appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for review of sentence. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. *See United States v. Beall,*No. CR-95-57-F (E.D.N.C. Mar. 19, 2002). 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.

*AFFIRMED.*
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 7 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 7

   Expressing the sense of the Congress that any Federal agency that 
   utilizes the Draize rabbit eye irritancy test should develop and 
validate alternative ophthalmic testing procedures that do not require 
                    the use of animal test subjects.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 1995

  Mr. Jacobs submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
                 referred to the Committee on Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
   Expressing the sense of the Congress that any Federal agency that 
   utilizes the Draize rabbit eye irritancy test should develop and 
validate alternative ophthalmic testing procedures that do not require 
                    the use of animal test subjects.

Whereas the Draize rabbit eye irritancy test has long been used by various 
        Federal agencies for predicting human opththalmic response to pesticides 
        and toxic chemicals, household cleaning solvents, some medicinal 
        products, and other hazardous substances;
Whereas the Draize test causes significant pain to the albino rabbit which is 
        used in each irritancy test; and
Whereas the reliability of the Draize test has been called into question: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of the Congress that the Department of Health and 
Human Services, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the 
Environmental Protection Agency, and any other department, agency, or 
instrumentality of the United States that utilizes the Draize rabbit 
eye irritancy test, should develop and validate alternative ophthalmic 
testing procedures that do not require the use of animal test subjects.

                                 <all>
```
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 Health and Human Services

###### Food and Drug Administration

          - 21 CFR Part 2

### CFR Correction

In Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations, parts 1 to 99, revised as of Apr. 1, 2009, on page 66, § 2.125(e)(2)(v) is reinstated as follows:

§ 2.125

* * * * *

(e) * * *

(2) * * *

(v) Epinephrine.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. E9-19297 Filed 8-10-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-6999

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

SETH MICHAEL FERRANTI,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District

Judge. (CR-91-337-A, CA-97-1075-AM)

Submitted: October 8, 1998 Decided: October 26, 1998

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Seth Michael Ferranti, Appellant Pro Se. Christine Fay Wright,

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:

Seth Michael Ferranti seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994

& Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning

of the district court. United States v. Ferranti, Nos. CR-91-337-A;

CA-97-1075-AM (E.D. Va. Apr. 22, 1998). 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
IV

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 191

To recognize and honor the Filipino World War II veterans for their defense

of democratic ideals and their important contribution to the outcome

of World War II.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 20, 1996

Mr. GILMAN (for himself, Mr. FILNER, Mr. STUMP, Mr. MONTGOMERY, Mr.

SOLOMON, Mr. DORNAN, Mr. CAMPBELL, Mr. BILBRAY, Mr. FLANAGAN,

Mr. TALENT, Ms. PELOSI, Mr. ABERCROMBIE, Mrs. MINK of Hawaii, Mr.

EVANS, Mr. MILLER of California, and Mr. GUTIERREZ) submitted the

following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on

International Relations

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

To recognize and honor the Filipino World War II veterans

for their defense of democratic ideals and their important

contribution to the outcome of World War II.

Whereas the Commonwealth of the Philippines was strategically located and thus vital to the defense of the United

States during World War II;

Whereas the military forces of the Commonwealth of the

Philippines were called into the United States Armed

Forces during World War II by Executive order and were

put under the command of General Douglas MacArthur;
2

•HCON 191 IH

Whereas the participation of the military forces of the Commonwealth of the Philippines in the battles of Bataan

and Corregidor and in other smaller skirmishes delayed

and disrupted the initial Japanese effort to conquer the

Western Pacific;

Whereas that delay and disruption allowed the United States

the vital time to prepare the forces which were needed to

drive the Japanese from the Western Pacific and to defeat Japan;

Whereas after the recovery of the Philippine Islands from

Japan, the United States was able to use the strategically

located Commonwealth of the Philippines as a base from

which to launch the final efforts to defeat Japan;

Whereas every American deserves to know the important contribution that the military forces of the Commonwealth of

the Philippines made to the outcome of World War II;

and

Whereas the Filipino World War II veterans deserve recognition and honor for their important contribution to the

outcome of World War II: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That the Congress recognizes and honors the

3 Filipino World War II veterans for their defense of demo4 cratic ideals and their important contribution to the out5 come of World War II.

Æ
Editorial Note on Part 301
Editorial Note: In the text of this part, integral section references are to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954; decimal section references are to the Code of Federal Regulations. References in the text to the “Code” are references to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.

§ 301.7701(i)-3 Effective dates and duration of taxable mortgage pool classification. ( a ) *Effective dates.* Except as otherwise provided, the regulations under section 7701(i) are effective and applicable September 6, 1995.
( b ) *Entities in existence on December 31, 1991* — ( 1 ) *In general.* For transitional rules concerning the application of section 7701(i) to entities in existence on December 31, 1991, see section 675(c) of the Tax Reform Act of 1986.
( 2 ) *Special rule for certain transfers.* A transfer made to an entity on or after September 6, 1995, is a substantial transfer for purposes of section 675(c)(2) of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 only if— ( i ) The transfer is significant in amount; and
( ii ) The transfer is connected to the entity's issuance of related debt obligations (as defined in paragraph (b)(3) of this section) that have different maturities (within the meaning of § 301.7701-1(e)).
( 3 ) *Related debt obligation.* A related debt obligation is a debt obligation whose payments bear a relationship (within the meaning of § 301.7701-1(f)) to payments on debt obligations that the entity holds as assets.
( 4 ) *Example.* The following example illustrates the principles of this paragraph (b): Example. On December 31, 1991, Partnership Q holds a pool of real estate mortgages that it acquired through retail sales of single family homes. Partnership Q raises $10,000,000 on October 25, 1996, by using this pool to issue related debt obligations with multiple maturities. The transfer of the $10,000,000 to Partnership Q is a substantial transfer (within the meaning of § 301.7701(i)-3(b)(2)).
( c ) *Duration of taxable mortgage pool classification* — ( 1 ) *Commencement and duration.* An entity is classified as a taxable mortgage pool on the first testing day that it meets the definition of a taxable mortgage pool. Once an entity is classified as a taxable mortgage pool, that classification continues through the day the entity retires its last related debt obligation.
( 2 ) *Testing day defined.* A testing day is any day on or after September 6, 1995, on which an entity issues a related debt obligation (as defined in paragraph (b)(3) of this section) that is significant in amount.
[T.D. 8610, 60 FR 40092, Aug. 7, 1995]