alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### The State of New Hampshire 

# Department of Environmental Services Thomas S. Burack, Commissioner

December 31,2013 Mr. C u rt Spalding, Administrator USEPA Region 1 5 Post Office Square Suite 100 Boston, MA 02109-3912 

### RE: SIP Revision Proposal for VOC RACT Order Concord Litho Group, Inc., Concord, NH Facility ID: 3301300062; RACT Order ARD07

- 003A

Pursuant to section I I 0 ofthe Clean Air Act and 

### as Governor Margaret Hassan's designee, I hereby submit for approval a proposed revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP). An e l ectronic version ofthis submittal, ich is an exact duplicat e ofthe paper version, is enclosed on a disk. This revision involves the issuance of a VOC Available Control Technology (RACT) Order in accordance with the New Hampshire Code of ministrative Rules, Env-A 1205 , 

### RA CTProced ures and Env-A 1216, 

### Offset Lithographic and Lett erpress Printing , Concord Litho Group, Inc
. , (Concord Litho) of Concord, NH. On August 23, 2013, Concord Litho filed an application to modify the RACT Order to remove the minimum**lt Pn~npr,;,t,**  for the RETOX 2000 and REEC O regenerative thermal oxidizers. The New Hampshire Department of vironmental Services, Air Resources Division (DES) published a public notice in the 

### Union Leader and the 

### Concord on October 10, 2013. No public comments or requests for a public heari ng were received during the comment od. DES finalized the order and submitted it to USEPA o n November 18,2013. This SIP revi s ion proposal includes the following documentation:
• A copy ofthe public notice published on October 10, 2013. • DES Proposed VOC RACT Order letter dated November 19,2013. • DES final RACT Order issuance letter dated December 31 , 2013. • Fina l RACT Order ARD07-003A issued on December 31,2013. • State Permit to Operate SP-0261 issued on November 18 , 2013. DES is hereby withdrawing its SIP regardi ng VOC RACT Order ARD07-003, issued to Concord L itho and blished in the Federal Register on November 5, 2012, and submitting VOC RACT Order ARD07

- 003A in its place. Should you require further information, please contact Patricia North ofthe Air Resources Division, Permitting Environmental Health Bureau at (603) 271-0901 or via e-mai l at patricia.north @ des.nh.gov.

CAW/prn 

### Sincerely,

# ~0~!/ Craig A. Wright Director A ir Resource division Enclosures: Final RACT Order ARD07-003A cc: David Conroy, USEPA El Jcannotte, Concord Litho Group, Inc. w /o enc losures 

### www.des.nh.gov 29 Hazen Drive • PO Box 95 • Concord, NH 03302-0095 (603) 271-3503 • TDD Access : Relay NH 1-800-735-2964
www.gpo.gov

### §416d. Advance payment of rent or other consideration

No rent or other consideration for the use of land leased under sections 416 to 416j of this title shall be paid or collected more than one year in advance, unless so provided in the lease.

(Pub. L. 89–715, §5, Nov. 2, 1966, 80 Stat. 1113.)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM ACG
HOLDINGS, INC.'S UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
FOR THE THREE MONTH PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000856710
<NAME>                        ACG HOLDINGS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000
<CURRENCY>                    U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>      3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                APR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                  JUN-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>               1
<CASH>                        0
<SECURITIES>                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                 53,681
<ALLOWANCES>                  1,565
<INVENTORY>                   9,707
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              65,512
<PP&E>                        258,123
<DEPRECIATION>                103,694
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                307,172
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>         67,242
<BONDS>                       185,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>         0
<PREFERRED>                   0
<COMMON>                      1
<OTHER-SE>                    (111,820)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  307,172
<SALES>                       127,813
<TOTAL-REVENUES>              127,813
<CGS>                         109,251
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 109,251
<OTHER-EXPENSES>              0
<LOSS-PROVISION>             425
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            9,417
<INCOME-PRETAX>               (548)
<INCOME-TAX>                  875
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           (1,423)
<DISCONTINUED>                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>               (4,020)
<CHANGES>                     0
<NET-INCOME>                  (5,443)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                 0
<EPS-DILUTED>                 0
        

</TABLE>
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1011

To extend the deadline under the Federal Power Act applicable to the

construction of a hydroelectric project in the State of Ohio.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 22, 1995

Mr. SAWYER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Commerce

A BILL

To extend the deadline under the Federal Power Act applicable to the construction of a hydroelectric project in the

State of Ohio.

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

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF DEADLINE.

4 Notwithstanding the time limitations of section 13 of

5 the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 806) the Federal En6 ergy Regulatory Commission, upon the request of the li7 censee for FERC Project No. 9423 (and after reasonable

8 notice), is authorized, in accordance with the good faith,

9 due diligence, and public interest requirements of such

10 section 13 and the Commission’s procedures under such
2

•HR 1011 IH

1 section, to extend the time required for commencement of

2 construction for the project for up to a maximum of 3

3 consecutive 2-year periods. This section shall take effect

4 for the project upon the expiration of the extension (issued

5 by the Commission under such section 13) of the period

6 required for commencement of construction of such

7 project.

Æ
# L_2020196EN.01001201.xml

| 19.6.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 196/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.6.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 196/12

---

COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2020/850

of 18 June 2020

amending Decision 2014/386/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in response to the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 29 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 23 June 2014, the Council adopted Decision 2014/386/CFSP (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 23 June 2014, the Council adopted Decision 2014/386/CFSP (1).

| (2) | The Council does not recognise and continues to condemn the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol by the Russian Federation and will remain committed to fully implementing its non-recognition policy. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The Council does not recognise and continues to condemn the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol by the Russian Federation and will remain committed to fully implementing its non-recognition policy.

| (3) | On the basis of a review of Decision 2014/386/CFSP, the restrictive measures should be renewed until 23 June 2021. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

On the basis of a review of Decision 2014/386/CFSP, the restrictive measures should be renewed until 23 June 2021.

| (4) | Decision 2014/386/CFSP should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

Decision 2014/386/CFSP should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

In Article 5 of Decision 2014/386/CFSP, the second paragraph is replaced by the following:

‘This Decision shall apply until 23 June 2021.’.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 18 June 2020.

For the Council

The President

A. METELKO-ZGOMBIĆ

---

(1)  Council Decision 2014/386/CFSP of 23 June 2014 concerning restrictive measures in response to the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol (OJ L 183, 24.6.2014, p. 70).

1

---
IA

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 53

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution to provide for a balanced budget

for the United States Government.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 11, 1995

Mr. THORNTON (for himself, Mr. FIELDS of Louisiana, Mr. OLVER, and Mr.

WISE) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution to provide for

a balanced budget for the United States Government.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled

3 (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the fol4 lowing article is proposed as an amendment to the Con5 stitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all

6 intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when

7 ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several

8 States within 7 years after the date of its submission for

9 ratification:
2

•HJ 53 IH

1 ‘‘ARTICLE —

2 ‘‘SECTION 1. Total outlays of the operating fund of

3 the United States for any fiscal year shall not exceed total

4 receipts to those funds for that fiscal year plus any operat5 ing fund balances carried over from previous fiscal years.

6 ‘‘SECTION 2. The Congress may waive the provisions

7 of this article for any fiscal year by a declaration of na8 tional urgency by the President that is approved by a ma9 jority vote of both Houses of the Congress.

10 ‘‘SECTION 3. Not later than the first Monday in Feb11 ruary in each calendar year, the President shall transmit

12 to the Congress a proposed budget for the United States

13 Government for the fiscal year beginning in that calendar

14 year in which the total outlays of the operating funds of

15 the United States for that fiscal year shall not exceed total

16 receipts to those funds for that fiscal year.

17 ‘‘SECTION 4. Total receipts of the operating funds

18 shall exclude those derived from net borrowing. Total out19 lays of the operating funds of the United States shall ex20 clude those for repayment of debt principal and for capital

21 and developmental investments that provide demonstrable

22 long-term economic returns but shall include an annual

23 debt servicing charge. The receipts (including attributable

24 interest) and outlays of the Federal Old-Age and Survivors

25 Insurance Trust Fund and the Federal Disability Insur-
3

•HJ 53 IH

1 ance Trust Fund together with outlays for benefits earned

2 by veterans of military service shall not be counted as re3 ceipts or outlays for purposes of this article.

4 ‘‘SECTION 5. This article shall be implemented and

5 enforced only in accordance with appropriate legislation

6 enacted by Congress, which may rely on estimates of out7 lays and receipts.

8 ‘‘SECTION 6. This section and section 5 of this article

9 shall take effect upon ratification. All other sections of this

10 article shall take effect beginning with fiscal year 2001

11 or the second fiscal year beginning after its ratification,

12 whichever is later.’’.

Æ
Order entered January 24, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-18-01381-CV

METHODIST HOSPITALS OF DALLAS D/B/A METHODIST HEALTH SYSTEM AND 

D/B/A METHODIST DALLAS MEDICAL CENTER, Appellant

V.

JESUS NIETO, RICHARDO FELIPE NIETO, JESSE NIETO, AND ORLANDO NIETO, 

EACH INDIVIDUALLY AND AS HEIRS OF THE ESTATE OF MARY JESSIE 

ALVAREZ, DECEASED, Appellees

On Appeal from the 193rd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-18-02115

ORDER

Before the Court is appellees’ January 23, 2019 unopposed second motion for extension 

of time to file their brief. We GRANT the motion and ORDER the brief received by the Court 

on January 23, 2019 timely filed as of the date of this order.

/s/ BILL WHITEHILL

JUSTICE
#### § 20.2055-6 Disallowance of double deduction in the case of qualified terminable interest property.

No deduction is allowed from the decedent's gross estate under section 2055 for property with respect to which a deduction is allowed by reason of section 2056(b)(7). See section 2056(b)(9) and § 20.2056(b)-9.

[T.D. 8522, 59 FR 9647, Mar. 1, 1994]
#### Armand Metichecchia et al., Respondents, v Frank Palmeri, Appellant, et al., Defendants.

[803 NYS2d 813]

Crew III, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Bradley, J.), entered February 7, 2005 in Ulster County, which denied defendant Frank Palmeri’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against him.

On February 16, 2004, plaintiff Armand Metichecchia, a Verizon employee making a service call, entered the front door of premises owned by defendant Frank Palmeri in the Town of Hurley, Ulster County, and fell through an opening in the floor that led to the basement. A trap door, which ordinarily covered the opening, had been left in the raised position.

*895Consequently, Metichecchia and his wife, derivatively, commenced this personal injury action against Palmeri, the owner and lessor of the property in question, defendant Donna Rowe, the lessee, and defendant Alyn Warren, a resident of the property at the time of the incident. Prior to discovery, Palmeri moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that, as an out-of-possession landlord, no liability could attach to him. Plaintiffs opposed the motion contending, among other things, that it was premature given the lack of relevant discovery. Supreme Court denied Palmeri’s motion without prejudice to renew at the completion of discovery. Palmeri now appeals and we affirm.

It is axiomatic that a summary judgment motion is properly denied as premature when the nonmoving party has not been given reasonable time and opportunity to conduct disclosure relative to pertinent evidence that is within the exclusive knowledge of the movant or a codefendant (see *Catena v Amsterdam Mem. Hosp.,*6 AD3d 1037, 1038-1039 [2004]). Here, plaintiffs surely are entitled to ascertain, through discovery, Palmeri’s knowledge of the allegedly dangerous condition, as well as the degree of control that he asserted over the premises. Accordingly, Supreme Court properly denied Palmeri’s motion on the ground of prematurity.

Cardona, *P.J.,*Mercure, Carpinello and Rose, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-40509

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JUAN MANUEL MACHADO-CARRIZALES,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

UDC No. L-96-CR-135-1

- - - - - - - - - -

April 02, 1998

Before JONES, SMITH, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Juan Manuel Machado-Carrizales appeal his guilty-plea

conviction to possession with intent to distribute approximately

377 pounds of marihuana and carrying a firearm during and in

relation to a drug-trafficking crime. He contends that the

district court failed to give him an opportunity to plead not

guilty pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(e)(4) when it was unlikely

that the district court would follow the sentencing

recommendation in the plea agreement.
No. 97-40509

-2-

The precepts of Rule 11(e)(4) do not apply to MachadoCarrizales’ plea agreement, which was entered into pursuant to

Rule 11(e)(1)(B). United States v. Babineau, 795 F.2d 518, 520

(5th Cir. 1986). This issue is without any arguable merit. The

appeal is frivolous and is DISMISSED as such. See 5th Cir. R.

42.2.

APPEAL DISMISSED.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-30439

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

GLENN METZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 92-469

- - - - - - - - - -

April 2, 1998

Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Glenn Metz, federal inmate #28118-048, appeals the district

court’s denial of his Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(e) motion requesting

the return of property. We have carefully reviewed the arguments

and appellate record. We construe his Rule 41(e) motion as a

civil complaint seeking equitable relief and treat the district

court’s denial of the motion as a summary judgment. See United

States v. Robinson, 78 F.3d 172, 174 (5th Cir. 1996). We

conclude that Metz failed to meet his summary-judgment burden in
No. 97-30439

-2-

demonstrating ownership of specified property. See Little v.

Liquid Air Corp., 37 F.3d 1069, 1075 (5th Cir. 1994) (en banc).

AFFIRMED.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

October 3, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly
131531(53) Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

LIBERTY HILL HOUSING CORPORATION, Petitioner-Appellant, SC: 131531

v COA: 258752 Mich Tax Tribunal: 00-298536 CITY OF LIVONIA, Respondent-Appellee.

________________ _______________

On order of the Chief Justice, th e motion by Homes for Autism for leave to file a brief amicus curiae is considered and it is GRANTED.

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

October 3, 2007

Clerk
EXHIBIT
      32





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350











We, each hereby certify to the best of
our knowledge that the Quarterly Report of Form 10-Q of Gateway Tax Credit Fund
II, Ltd. for the period ended June 30, 2008 containing the financial statements
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o (d)) and that information contained
in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of Gateway.








/s/ Ronald M.
      Diner
              Ronald
      M. Diner
              President
              Raymond
      James Tax Credit Funds, Inc.
              (Managing
      General Partner)
              August
      12, 2008/s/ Jonathan
      Oorlog
              Jonathan
      Oorlog
              Vice
      President and Chief Financial Officer
              Raymond
      James Tax Credit Funds, Inc.
              (Managing
      General Partner)
              August
      12, 2008
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED December 10, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-30434 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus DWAYNE KENNEDY, also known as Tater, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 02-CR-302-4-B

-------------------- Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * Dwayne Kennedy appeals his guilty-plea conviction for one count of conspiracy to possess and distribute cocaine and marijuana and one count of possession of a firearm in connection with a drug offense. Kennedy argues that the district court’s erroneous advice concerning the maximum sentence on his firearm possession offense invalidated his guilty plea. Because Kennedy failed to object to the district court’s Rule 11 colloquy, the issue is reviewed for plain error.No. 03-30434 -2- United States v. Vonn , 535 U.S. 55, 58-59 (2002). Under the plain-error standard of review, “reversal is not required unless there is (1) an error; (2) that is clear or plain; (3) that affects the defendant’s substantial rights; and (4) that seriously affects the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings.” United States v. Vasquez , 216 F.3d 456, 459 (5th Cir. 2000). The district court misadvised Kennedy that the maximum penalty on the firearm possession count was five years’ imprisonment. The stated term was in fact the mandatory minimum term of imprisonment. See 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(i). Although the district court erred, Kennedy fails to establish that the error affected his substantial rights. See Vasquez , 216 F.3d at 459. At rearraignment, Kennedy confirmed that his maximum sentencing exposure was life imprisonment on the conspiracy count and that any sentence imposed on the firearm possession count would run consecutively to any other sentence imposed. The district court imposed only a 120-month sentence on the conspiracy count and a 60-month sentence on the firearm possession count. See United States v. Cuevas-Andrade , 232 F.3d 440, 444 (5th Cir. 2000). Kennedy has not established that the district court’s error materially affected his guilty plea.

See United States v. Reyes , 300 F.3d 555, 558 (5th Cir. 2002). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 32.2

                       CERTIFICATION OF VICE-PRESIDENT
                             BIRCH BRANCH, INC.
                      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Birch Branch, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
George Powell, Vice-President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

     (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d), as applicable, 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/ George A. Powell
George A. Powell
Vice-President, Secretary and Director
May 16, 2005