alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1815.108 Actions that normally require an EIS. ( a ) If necessary, the Fund shall perform or have performed an environmental assessment to determine if an Application, or any portion of an Application, requires an EIS. However, it may be readily apparent that a proposed action in an Application will have a significant impact on the environment; in such cases, an environmental assessment is not required and the Fund shall immediately begin to prepare, or have prepared, an EIS.
( b ) An EIS normally is required where an Application proposes to directly use financial assistance from the Fund for any Project that would: ( 1 ) Remove, demolish, convert, or substantially rehabilitate 2,500 or more existing housing units, or would result in the construction or installation of 2,500 or more new housing units, or which would provide sites for 2,500 or more new housing units; or
( 2 ) Remove, demolish, convert, or substantially rehabilitate 1,500,000 square feet or more of commercial space, or would result in the construction or installation of 1,500,000 square feet or more of new commercial space, or which would provide sites for 1,500,000 square feet or more of new commercial space.
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3228

To withdraw normal trade relations treatment from the products of the 

People’s Republic of China. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 2, 2003

Mr. SANDERS (for himself, Mr. WAMP, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. GOODE, 

Mr. SENSENBRENNER, Mr. MICHAUD, Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi, Mr. 

HINCHEY, Mr. CLAY, Mr. PALLONE, Mr. STRICKLAND, Mr. PASCRELL, 

Mr. KUCINICH, Mr. LIPINSKI, Mr. FILNER, Mr. DEFAZIO, Mr. TAYLOR

of North Carolina, Mr. VISCLOSKY, Mr. GREEN of Texas, Mr. EVANS, 

Mr. RYAN of Ohio, Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota, Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts, Mr. CAPUANO, Mr. COSTELLO, Mr. ABERCROMBIE, Mr. 

GRIJALVA, Ms. SLAUGHTER, Mr. COBLE, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. 

TOWNS, and Mr. BACA) introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL

To withdraw normal trade relations treatment from the 

products of the People’s Republic of China.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 3228 IH 

1 SECTION 1. WITHDRAWAL OF NORMAL TRADE RELATIONS 

2 TREATMENT FROM THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC 

3 OF CHINA. 

4 Notwithstanding the provisions of title I of Public 

5 Law 106–286, title IV of the Trade Act of 1974, or any 

6 other provision of law, effective on the date of the enact7 ment of this Act, normal trade relations treatment shall 

8 not apply to the products of the People’s Republic of 

9 China, and normal trade relations treatment may not 

10 thereafter be extended to the products of that country.

Æ
*

 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 circumstancesset forth in 5TH CIR.R. 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FIFTH CIRCUIT

____________

No. 02-11046

(Summary Calender)

____________

MANASSEH ADRIEL PHILIP,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

ANNE M. ESTRADA, DISTRICT DIRECTOR,

United States Immigration and Naturalization Service;

JOHN ASHCROFT, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondents-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:98-CV-987-P

March 19, 2003

Before DAVIS, WIENER, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Manasseh Adriel Philip appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to reopen 28 U.S.C.

§ 2241 proceedings. The district court construed Philip’s pro se motion, which was filed more than
-2-

two years after entry ofthe judgment that denied § 2241 relief, as arising under FED.R.CIV. P. 60(b).

We review a decision on a FED. R. CIV. P. 60(b) motion for an abuse of discretion. Hess v.

Cockrell, 281 F.3d 212, 215 (5th Cir. 2002). Philip contends that he is entitled to relief under the

Supreme Court’s decision in INS v. St. Cyr, 533 U.S. 289, 326 (2001), which held that discretionary

relieffrom deportation under § 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act “remains available for

aliens. . . whose convictions were obtained through plea agreements and who, notwithstanding those

convictions, would have been eligible for § 212(c) relief at the time of their plea under the law then

in effect.” Philip is correct that, under St. Cyr, he was entitled to apply for discretionary relief. The

record, however, reveals that Philip’s application for discretionary relief was, in fact, considered by

the immigration judge, who denied the request on the merits. The immigration judge concluded that

Philip had fallen “woefully short of meeting the required burden” for discretionary relief because he

had abused, and failed to economically support, his family; continued to deny responsibility for his

actions; and failed to demonstrate rehabilitation. None of the evidence of subsequent rehabilitation

now cited by Philip was before the immigration judge or the Board of Immigration Appeals. Thus,

St. Cyr does not entitle Philip to anything he has not already received.

Philip’sremaining arguments are conclusoryandwithout merit. Because Philip has not shown

that the district court abused its discretion in denying FED.R.CIV. P. 60(b) relief, the judgment of the

district court is AFFIRMED.
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 2013 - 0019 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 2010 - SW - 051 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: **Next Step:** FRAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. No 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, lis t latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter togeth er. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR- M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch M anager**  **Date**
§ 390.417 Use of the offering circular. ( a ) An offering circular or amendment declared effective by the FDIC shall not be used more than nine months after the effective date, unless the information contained therein is as of a date not more than 16 months prior to such use.
( b ) An offering circular filed under § 390.414(b)(3) shall not extend the period for which an effective offering circular or amendment may be used under paragraph (c) of this section.
( c ) If any event arises, or change in fact occurs, after the effective date and such event or change in fact, individually or in the aggregate, results in the offering circular containing any untrue statement of material fact, or omitting to state a material fact necessary in order to make statements made in the offering circular not misleading under the circumstances, then no offering circular, which has been declared effective under this subpart, shall be used until an amendment reflecting such event or change in fact has been filed with, and declared effective by, the FDIC.
H. R. 3234

One Hundred Eighth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,

the twentieth day of January, two thousand and four

An Act

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 14 Chestnut

Street in Liberty, New York, as the ‘‘Ben R. Gerow Post Office Building’’.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

The facility of the United States Postal Service located at

14 Chestnut Street in Liberty, New York, shall be known and

designated as the ‘‘Ben R. Gerow Post Office Building’’.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper,

or other record of the United States to the facility referred to

in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Ben R.

Gerow Post Office Building’’.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

 

 

I, Cristian Montes Lahaye, the Chief Financial Officer of Madeco S.A. (the "Company"), hereby certify pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that: 

1.	the Company's annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2005, to which this statement is filed as an exhibit (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. 

 

 

Date: June 29, 2006 

 

/s/ Cristian Montes Lahaye

Cristian Montes Lahaye

Chief Financial Officer
p.1 

OAR Box 1384 

Prepped by Charmelle Mathews 

Document Number: 

^_2327ll-E-192 

Docket Number: 

A-94-52 

Printed 7/2/2008 8:42:11AM Sheet 232 of 264 
P.2 

OCT 21 '98 10:58AM GLASFORfg INC PES RTP NC p.272>02 

--•/ 

From: 

Date: 

Contact: 

Company: 

Contact Report 

Shawn McKee, Pacific Environmental Services, Inc. (PES) 

October 9,1998 and October 16,1998 

Mr. Terry McQuarrie 

Glasfonns, Inc. 

Telephone Number: (408)297-9300 

Fax Number: (408)297-0601 

uaDOCKF.T 

Contact Summajy: 

Mr.Terry McQuarrie was contacted to provide information about the costs associated with 

the mixer covers used at Glasfbrms, Inc. facilities. In response TO my questions Mr. McQuarrie 

indicated the following: 

The Glasforms, Inc. facility in Birmingham, Alabama, has two 55 gallon mixers, each of 

which is covered with lid. These lids allow for closed, covered mixing with no visible gaps into (he 

drum. The space leil for insertion of the mixer shaft is covered by bristles which do not leave a 

visible gap. 

The raw material costs are approximately SSO per lid, and the labor costs are approximately 

545 per lid. After about six months of use the lids become dirty and develop polyoiygopo "icogiffVJog*, and must be replaced. If tag polystyrenc-ico doltloa break uIT «uid di op jam Hie, li&in bemg 

The smallest-covorcd, vuVooiud mixing container used by Glasfbrms, Inc is five gallons. 

These mixing containers are used less frequently for smaller batches of resin. The small batches are 

used in the smaller machines which require 15 to 50 lbs of resin per batch. These quantities would 

not allow for efficient mixing in a 55 gallon container. All of the mixing done hi the five gallon 

containers is done by mechanical mixers, which arc modified drills with mixer blades attached. 

INFORMATION IS ACCURA
Exhibit 32.1


                    CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                     18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                     AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                       SECTION 906 OF THE
                   SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Epolin, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ended May 31, 2004,  as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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, to the best of the undersigned's knowledge, 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.


Dated: December 8, 2004      By:/s/Murray S. Cohen
                             Murray S. Cohen,
                             Chairman of the Board and
                             Chief Executive Officer


Dated: December 8, 2004      By:/s/James Ivchenko
                             James Ivchenko,
                             President (Principal Financial
                             Officer)
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3084 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3084

To amend the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001 to extend 
         the deadline for filing a claim to December 31, 2004.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 16, 2003

   Mr. Conyers (for himself, Mr. Nadler, Mr. Scott of Virginia, Ms. 
Jackson-Lee of Texas, Mr. Meehan, Mr. Delahunt, Mr. Weiner, Mr. Schiff, 
Mr. Langevin, Mr. Scott of Georgia, Ms. Carson of Indiana, Mr. Sanders, 
Mr. Crowley, and Mr. Moran of Virginia) introduced the following bill; 
          which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001 to extend 
         the deadline for filing a claim to December 31, 2004.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``September 11th Victim Compensation 
Fund Extension Act of 2003''.

SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF DEADLINE TO FILE A CLAIM TO DECEMBER 31, 2004.

    Section 405(a) of September 11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001 
(Public Law 107-42; 49 U.S.C. 40101 note) is amended by striking 
paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
            ``(3) Limitation.--No claim may be filed under paragraph 
        (1) after December 31, 2004.''.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3070 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3070

To authorize appropriations for the Coastal Heritage Trail Route in New 
                    Jersey, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 10, 2003

   Mr. LoBiondo (for himself, Mr. Saxton, Mr. Holt, Mr. Andrews, Mr. 
  Pallone, Mr. Frelinghuysen, Mr. Smith of New Jersey, Mr. Payne, Mr. 
Pascrell, Mr. Rothman, Mr. Ferguson, Mr. Garrett of New Jersey, and Mr. 
  Menendez) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                         Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To authorize appropriations for the Coastal Heritage Trail Route in New 
                    Jersey, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR COASTAL HERITAGE TRAIL 
              ROUTE IN NEW JERSEY.

    (a) Reauthorization.--Section 6 of Public Law 100-515 (16 U.S.C. 
1244 note) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (b)(1), by striking ``$4,000,000'' and 
        inserting ``$8,000,000''; and
            (2) in subsection (c), by striking ``10'' and inserting 
        ``15''.
    (b) Strategic Plan.--
            (1) In general.--The Secretary of the Interior shall, by 
        not later than 4 years after the date of the enactment of this 
        Act, prepare a strategic plan for the New Jersey Coastal 
        Heritage Trail Route.
            (2) Contents.--The strategic plan shall describe--
                    (A) opportunities to increase participation by 
                national and local private and public interests in 
                planning, development, and administration of the New 
                Jersey Coastal Heritage Trail Route; and
                    (B) organizational options for sustaining the New 
                Jersey Coastal Heritage Trail Route.
    (c) Grants.--Public Law 100-515 (16 U.S.C. 1244 note) is amended--
            (1) by inserting ``and grants (subject to the availability 
        of appropriations)'' after ``technical assistance''; and
            (2) in section 6(b)(2) by inserting ``and grants'' after 
        ``technical assistance''.
                                 <all>
```
1996 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

12-9-1996

Humphreys v. DEA

Precedential or Non-Precedential:

Docket 96-3099

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1996

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 1996 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"Humphreys v. DEA" (1996). 1996 Decisions. Paper 9.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1996/9
 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

 FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT 

 

 

 No. 96-3099 

 

 

 EARL A. HUMPHREYS, M.D., 

 Petitioner 

 

 v. 

 DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION, 

 Respondent. 

 

 

 On the motion of the Drug Enforcement Administration to vacate 

the September 17, 1996 decision and dismiss the appeal as moot. 

 

 

 Present:Becker, Stapleton, and Michel,* Circuit Judges 

 ORDER 

 This cause came on to be heard on the motion of the 

Drug Enforcement Administration to vacate the September 17, 1996 

decision and to dismiss the appeal as moot. 

 On consideration whereof, and in accordance with the 

panel's written decision it is here ordered and adjudged by this 

Court that the motion to vacate the September 17, 1996 panel 

decision as moot and to dismiss the appeal is denied. The Drug 

Enforcement Agency shall have 14 days from the date of this order 

*Hon. Paul R. Michel, United States Circuit Judge for the Federal 

Circuit, sitting by designation. 

in which to file a petition for rehearing and/or rehearing en 

banc. 

 ATTEST: 
 Chief Deputy Clerk 

Dated: December 9, 1996
[if !vml]>[endif]>
[if !vml]>[endif]>
Youhave reached the Federal Depository Library Program Electronic Collection(FDLP/EC) Archive. This archive assures ongoing access to publications in theFDLP/EC. Access to publications in the archive is available through GPO's suiteof cataloging and locator services, including the Catalog of U.S. GovernmentPublications.
**Title:****Points of pride [electronic resource].
** 
2005| 2006 | 2007
 
SuDoc Number:TD 10.15/4:
Item Number:0982-K-15 (online)
CGP System Number:000606180
 
 
** 
**Permanent Public Access
** 
Title 44 of  the United States Code (44 U.S.C. Section 1911) stipulates that public access  to official Government information products disseminated through the Federal  Depository Library Program (FDLP) must be maintained permanently in regional  depository libraries and by depository libraries not served by a regional  library. Since online products are not physically distributed to depository  libraries for retention, GPO has assumed responsibility for the provision of  permanent access to Government information products residing on FDsys  servers.
GPO's  permanent public access commitment is also met by bringing  agency-disseminated Internet resources under the purview of GPO and  incorporating them into a digital archive. GPO captures copies of agency  electronic information products, and creates PURLs so that users will be  automatically redirected to the archived products if the information is no  longer accessible on the agency Web site. Please refer to the report Managing  the FDLP Electronic Collection: A Policy and Planning Document for more  information.
 
July 13, 2017**********
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>  5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
MARCH 31, 1997 UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                                                      <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                              3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                    DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                       JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                         MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                                   494,000
<SECURITIES>                                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                          2,517,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                              40,000
<INVENTORY>                                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                       3,362,000
<PP&E>                                                 3,778,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                         2,638,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                         5,511,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                  3,147,000
<BONDS>                                                1,184,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                      4,000
<PREFERRED>                                                    0
<COMMON>                                                  53,000
<OTHER-SE>                                             1,217,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                           5,511,000
<SALES>                                                4,678,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                       4,678,000
<CGS>                                                  2,794,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                          2,794,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         743,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                        54,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                        1,087,000           
<INCOME-TAX>                                             495,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      592,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                0
<CHANGES>                                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                             592,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                  0
        

</TABLE>