alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[No. 26043-3-II.

Division Two.

October 25, 2002.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Curtis Emery Caton, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Clark County, No. 98-1-02219-1, Edwin L. Poyfair, J., entered May 30, 2000. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Morgan, J., concurred in by Quinn-Brintnall, A.C.J., and Bridgewater, J.
§ 500.143 Civil money penalty assessment. ( a ) A civil money penalty may be assessed for each violation of the Act or these regulations.
( b ) In determining the amount of penalty to be assessed for any violation of the Act or these regulations the Secretary shall consider the type of violation committed and other relevant factors, including but not limited to the following: ( 1 ) Previous history of violation or violations of this Act and the Farm Labor Contractor Registration Act;
( 2 ) The number of workers affected by the violation or violations;
( 3 ) The gravity of the violation or violations;
( 4 ) Efforts made in good faith to comply with the Act (such as when a joint employer agricultural employer/association provides employment-related benefits which comply with applicable law to agricultural workers, or takes reasonable measures to ensure farm labor contractor compliance with legal obligations);
( 5 ) Explanation of person charged with the violation or violations;
( 6 ) Commitment to future compliance, taking into account the public health, interest or safety, and whether the person has previously violated the Act;
( 7 ) The extent to which the violator achieved a financial gain due to the violation, or the potential financial loss or potential injury to the workers.
[48 FR 36741, Aug. 12, 1983, as amended at 62 FR 11748, Mar. 12, 1997]
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTALPROTECTIONAGENCY REGION 4 ATLANTAFEDERALCENTER 61 FORSYTH STREET ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960

March 13,2012

Mr. Michael Halpin Director Division ofAir Resources Management Florida Department of Environmental Protection Mail Station 5500 2600 Blair Stone Road Tallahassee, 

### FL 32399-2400 Dear Mr. Halpin:
Enclosed is the final end-of-year report for your agency's FY 2011 Air Pollution Control grant authorized by 

## 5 105ofthe Clean Air Act. This report outlines your agency's various grant commitments and their status. Sincethere were no issues and no adjustments necessary your report is now finalized. This letter documents the conclusion ofthejoint evaluation process required by 40 Code of Federal Regulations 35.115 and identified as a commitment 

### in your FY 201 1 Air Planning Agreement under Cross Cutting Issues. We appreciate the progress you made in FY 201 1 and look forward to continuing ourjoint efforts to protect and improve air quality. If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at (404) 562- 9097 or Artra 

### B. Cooper at (404) 562-9047
Sincerely,

Chief Air Toxics and Monitoring Branch Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division

Enclosure

Internet Address (URL) http://www.epa.gov RecycledlRecyclable .Printed with Vegetable 011 Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Mlnimum 30% Poslconsumer)
III 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 235 

Designating July 1, 2007, as ‘‘National Boating Day’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 14, 2007 

Mr. WHITEHOUSE (for himself and Mr. VITTER) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Designating July 1, 2007, as ‘‘National Boating Day’’. 

Whereas the United States boating population exceeds 

73,000,000 individuals utilizing and enjoying nearly 

18,000,000 recreational watercraft; 

Whereas the recreational boating industry provides more than 

$39,000,000,000 in sales and services to the United 

States economy and provides nearly 380,000 manufacturing jobs; 

Whereas there are approximately 1,400 active boat builders 

in the United States with parts and materials being contributed from all fifty States; 

Whereas boating appeals to all age groups and is a haven for 

relaxation that includes sailing, diving, fishing, water skiing, tubing, sightseeing, swimming, and more; 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•SRES 235 IS 

Whereas boaters serve as monitors and stewards of the environment, educating future generations in the value of 

this country’s abundant water and other natural resources; and 

Whereas Congress passed the Federal Boat Safety Act of 

1971 and later created the Aquatic Resources Trust 

Fund in 1984, both of these actions having resulted in 

a decline in the rate of boating injuries: Now, therefore, 

be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) designates July 1, 2007, as ‘‘National Boat3 ing Day’’; 

4 (2) recognizes the value of recreational boating 

5 and commemorates the boating industry of the 

6 United States for its environmental stewardship and 

7 innumerable contributions to the economy and to the 

8 mental and physical health of those who enjoy boats; 

9 and 

10 (3) urges citizens, policy makers, and elected 

11 officials to celebrate National Boating Day and to 

12 become more aware of the overall contributions of 

13 boating to the lives of the people of the United 

14 States and to the Nation. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
Consent of Independent Auditors

            We consent to the  incorporation by reference in the  Post-Effective
Amendment No. 3 to Registration Statement (No. 33-16238) on Form S-8 relating to
Long Island  Lighting  Company's  Employee Stock  Purchase Plan,  Post-Effective
Amendment No. 1 to Registration  Statement (No. 2-87427) on Form S-3 relating to
Long Island Lighting Company's  Automatic Dividend  Reinvestment Plan and in the
related Prospectus, Registration Statement (No. 2-88578) on Form S-3 relating to
the  issuance of Common  Stock and in the related  Prospectus  and  Registration
Statement  (No.  33-52963)  on Form S-3  relating to the issuance of General and
Refunding Bonds, Debentures,  Preferred Stock or Common Stock and in the related
Prospectus,  of our report  dated May 22, 1998,  with  respect to the  financial
statements and schedule of Long Island Lighting  Company included in this Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 1998.



/s/ Ernst & Young LLP
---------------------

Melville, New York
May 26, 1998
----

Appeal brought on 22 September 2004 by Sumitomo Metal Industries Ltd against the judgment delivered on 8 July 2004 by the Second Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in joined cases T-67/00, T-68/00, T-71/00 and T-78/00 between JFE Engineering Corp., Nippon Steel Corp., JFE Steel Corp. and Sumimoto Metal Industries Ltd and the Commission of the European Communities

(Case C-403/04 P)

(2004/C 284/19)

An appeal against the judgment delivered on 8 July 2004 by the Second Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in joined cases T-67/00, T-68/00, T-71/00 and T-78/00 between JFE Engineering Corp., Nippon Steel Corp., JFE Steel Corp. and Sumimoto Metal Industries Ltd and the Commission of the European Communities, was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 22 September 2004 by Sumitomo Metal Industries Ltd, established in Osaka, Japan, represented by C. Vajda QC and G. Sproul, Solicitor.

The Appellant claims that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments:

The Appellant submits that the judgment of the Court of First Instance should be set aside on the following grounds:

----
§ 4231.14 Description of financial assistance merger. A request for a financial assistance merger must include the following information about the proposed financial assistance merger: ( a ) A detailed description of the proposed financial assistance merger, including any larger integrated transaction of which the merger is a part (including, but not limited to, an application for suspension of benefits under section 305(e)(9)(G) of ERISA).
( b ) A narrative description of the events that led to the plan sponsors' decision to submit a request for a financial assistance merger.
( c ) A narrative description of significant risks and assumptions relating to the proposed financial assistance merger and the projections provided in support of the request.
( d ) A detailed description of the estimated total amount of financial assistance the plan sponsors request for each year, including the supporting data, calculations, assumptions, and a description of the methodology used to determine the estimated amounts.
# EIGINAL
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 22-0018 S.W. , a minor, by and through her Guardian Jeffrey Ferguson, 

### OCT 1 8 2022 Bowen Greenwood Clerk of Supreme Court State of luiorrtana Plaintiffand Appellee, v. STATE OF MONTANA, by and through the Montana Department ofPublic Health and Human Services, Defendant and Appellant. ORDER

On October 11, 2022, Montana Association ofCounties (MACo) filed a motion for leaveto file an amicus briefin this appeal. The motion indicated that the Appellant State of Montana did not object butthat counsel forPlaintiffand Appellee S.W. opposed themotion. The Court entered an order the same day, granting MACo leave to file on or before November 3, 2022. Wilson responded the followingday, askingthe Court eithertoreconsider or to grant leave to file a sur-response briefconfined to new matters raised by MACo. Wilson pointed out that she had filed her Appellee's Response Briefwell before MACo filed its motion and would be left unable to respond to its arguments. Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee S.W. is granted leave to file an additional brief, limited to arguments made in MACo's amicus brief. The brief shall be filed on or before November 17, 2022, and shall not exceed 3,000 words. The Clerk is directed to provide a copy ofthis Order to all counsel ofrecord. DATED this l eta;Of October, 2022. 

# 1 Justice 10/18/2022

Case Number: DA 22-0018

# t€
L,.4 4

/ 1 -1" 4 " %.

Justict

9
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                       49,401
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                      3,641
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                          13,905
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                        46,921
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 113,868
<COMMON>                                         7,357
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                           38
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                             31,562
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                  38,957
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                            36,120
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                               1,400
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                    1,315
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                  36,076
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                  113,868
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                       55,247
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                             1,180
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      49,702
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      50,882
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                          4,365
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                 318
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                   4,683
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         3,762
<NET-INCOME>                                    (5,315) 
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   (5,315)
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                         2,976
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                        3,432
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                           3,427
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (3.287)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (3.287)
<FN>
<F1>  NET INCOME INCLUDES EXTRAORDINARY LOSS OF (6,236)
#### § 452.29 Primary elections.

Where a union holds primary elections or similar procedures for eliminating candidates prior to the final vote in connection with regular elections subject to these provisions, the primary election or other procedure must be conducted in accordance with the same standards required under the Act for the final election.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

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

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

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

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DONG YU,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 10-72380

Agency No. A099-370-295

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted October 9, 2012** 

Before: RAWLINSON, MURGUIA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

Dong Yu, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of the

Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an

immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of

removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Our

FILED

OCT 12 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 10-72380

jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence

the agency’s factual findings, applying the new standards governing adverse

credibility determinations created by the Real ID Act. Shrestha v. Holder, 590

F.3d 1034, 1039 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition

for review. 

Even if credible, substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that Yu

failed to establish the harm he suffered or will suffer if he returns to China was or

would be on account of his political opinion. See Kozulin v. INS, 218 F.3d 1112,

1115-17 (9th Cir. 2000) (evidence did not compel conclusion that beating of

Russian anti-communist, shortly after he reported misconduct of his ship captain,

was on account of political opinion). Accordingly, in the absence of a nexus, his

asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Ochoa v. Gonzales, 406 F.3d

1166, 1172 (9th Cir. 2005). 

Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s conclusion that Yu has not

established it is more likely than not he will be tortured upon return to China. See

Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1068 (9th Cir. 2009). Accordingly, his CAT

claim fails. 

We lack jurisdiction to consider Yu’s due process challenge, his claim based

on Christianity, and his claim based on involuntary sterilization because he did not
3 10-72380

exhaust these claims before the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677-

78 (9th Cir. 2004). 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
§ 4206.1 Purpose and scope. ( a ) *Purpose.* The purpose of this part is to prescribe rules, pursuant to section 4206(b) of ERISA, for adjusting the partial or complete withdrawal liability of an employer that previously partially withdrew from the same multiemployer plan. Section 4206(b)(1) provides that when an employer that has partially withdrawn from a plan subsequently incurs liability for another partial or a complete withdrawal from that plan, the employer's liability for the subsequent withdrawal is to be reduced by the amount of its liability for the prior partial withdrawal (less any waiver or reduction of that prior liability). Section 4206(b)(2) requires the PBGC to prescribe regulations adjusting the amount of this credit to ensure that the liability for the subsequent withdrawal properly reflects the employer's share of liability with respect to the plan. The purpose of the credit is to protect a withdrawing employer from being charged twice for the same unfunded vested benefits of the plan. The reduction in the credit protects the other employers in the plan from becoming responsible for unfunded vested benefits properly allocable to the withdrawing employer. In the interests of simplicity, the rules in this part provide for, generally, a one-step calculation of the adjusted credit under section 4206(b)(2) against the subsequent liability, rather than for separate calculations first of the credit under section 4206(b)(1) and then of the reduction in the credit under paragraph (b)(2) of that section. In cases where the withdrawal liability for the prior partial withdrawal was reduced by an abatement or other reduction of that liability, the adjusted credit is further reduced in accordance with § 4206.8 of this part.
( b ) *Scope.* This part applies to multiemployer plans covered under title IV of ERISA, and to employers that have partially withdrawn from such plans after September 25, 1980 and subsequently completely or partially withdraw from the same plan.
**Exhibit 32**

 

**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 Bear Lake Recreation, Inc. (the “Registrant”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending September 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Quarterly Report”), we, Wayne Bassham, Principal Executive Officer, and Todd Albiston, Principal Financial Officer, of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

 

(1) The Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Registrant. 

 

 

| *Date:*** | *11/10/08*** | * * | *By:***  | */s/Wayne Bassham***           |
|-----------|--------------|----------|----------|--------------------------------|
| * *  | * *     | * * | * * | *Wayne Bassham***              |
| * *  | * *     | * * | * * | *President and Director***     |
| * *  | * *     | * * | * * | *Bear Lake Recreation, Inc.*** |
| * *  | * *     | * * | * * | * *                       |
| *Date:*** | *11/10/08*** | * * | *By:***  | */s/Todd Albiston***           |
| * *  | * *     | * * | * * | *Todd Albiston***              |
| * *  | * *     | * * | * * | *Secretary and Director***     |
| * *  | * *     | * * | * * | *Bear Lake Recreation, Inc.*** |
§ 516.23 Employees of hospitals and residential care facilities compensated for overtime work on the basis of a 14-day work period pursuant to section 7(j) of the Act. With respect to each employee of hospitals and institutions primarily engaged in the care of the sick, the aged, or mentally ill or defective who reside on the premises compensated for overtime work on the basis of a work period of 14 consecutive days pursuant to an agreement or understanding under section 7(j) of the Act, employers shall maintain and preserve. ( a ) The records required by § 516.2 except paragraphs (a) (5) and (7) through (9), and in addition: ( 1 ) Time of day and day of week on which the employee's 14-day work period begins,
( 2 ) Hours worked each workday and total hours worked each 14-day work period,
( 3 ) Total straight-time wages paid for hours worked during the 14-day period,
( 4 ) Total overtime excess compensation paid for hours worked in excess of 8 in a workday and 80 in the work period.
( b ) A copy of the agreement or understanding with respect to using the 14-day period for overtime pay computations or, if such agreement or understanding is not in writing, a memorandum summarizing its terms and showing the date it was entered into and how long it remains in effect.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT

IN THE INTEREST OF: OF A.I.S., A MINOR PETITION OF T.T.S., FATHER : : : : : No. 530 MAL 2019
Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM AND NOW , this 10th day of October, 2019 , the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is DENIED

.
III 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 9 

Celebrating the contributions of the architectural profession during ‘‘National 

Architecture Week’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 6, 2007 

Ms. LANDRIEU submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 

referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Celebrating the contributions of the architectural profession 

during ‘‘National Architecture Week’’. 

Whereas the architectural profession has made unique contributions to the history, texture, and quality of life in 

the United States; 

Whereas the beginning of an organized architectural profession in the United States was signified by the founding 

of the American Institute of Architects 150 years ago; 

Whereas today there are approximately 281,000 individuals 

in the United States who work in the profession of architecture; 

Whereas architects express the richness of the Nation’s heritage and the vitality of its spirit through the vigilant stewardship of great architectural and historic treasures; 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
2 

•SCON 9 IS 

Whereas architects improve the quality of life for all individuals in the United States by combining advances in building technology with design innovation to build healthy, 

safe, livable, and sustainable buildings and communities; 

and 

Whereas the week beginning April 8, 2007, has been designated by the American Institute of Architects as ‘‘National Architecture Week’’ to bring attention to the importance of the architectural profession to the United 

States: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 

2 concurring), That— 

3 (1) it is the sense of the Congress that the con4 tributions of the architectural profession should be 

5 recognized and celebrated during ‘‘National Archi6 tecture Week’’; and 

7 (2) the Congress encourages the people of the 

8 United States and interested organizations to ob9 serve ‘‘National Architecture Week’’ with appro10 priate ceremonies and activities. 

Æ 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS