alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
This memorandum opinion was not selected for pub lication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated errors or other deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does not include the filing date. IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO 1

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST 2 COMPANY, AS TRUSTEE OF THE 3 HOME EQUITY MORTGAGE LOAN 4 ASSET-BACKED TRUST SERIES 5 INABS 2005-C, HOME EQUITY MORTGAGE 6 LOAN ASSET-BACKED CERTIFICATES, 7 SERIES INABS 2005-C UNDER THE 8 POOLING AND SERVICING AGREEMENT 9 DATED SEPTEMBER 1, 2005 , 10 Plaintiff-Appellee, 11

v. NO. 34,942 12 EARNEST M. LUCERO a/k/a ERNEST 13 M. LUCERO, CATHY I. LUCERO, and 14 THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO 15 DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION 16 AND REVENUE, 17 Defendants-Appellants. 18 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF SAN MIGUEL COUNTY 19 Abigail Aragon, District Judge 20 Rose L. Brand & Associates, P.C. 21 Karla K. Poe 22 Albuquerque, NM 23 for Appellee 242 Ernest M. Lucero 1 Cathy I. Lucero 2 Las Vegas, NM 3 Pro Se Appellants 4 MEMORANDUM OPINION 5 KENNEDY, Judge. 6
{1} Defendants-Appellants (Homeowners) appeal in a self-represented capacity 7 from the district court’s ruling that Plaintiff-Appellee DeutscheBank National Trust 8 Company (Bank) has standing to enforce the note and the mortgage. [RP Vol.II/274, 9 311] Our notice proposed to dismiss for lack of a final order. Ho meowners did not file 10 a response to our notice, and Bank filed a response in support. For reasons provided 11 in our notice, we dismiss for lack of a final order. 12
{3} IT IS SO ORDERED. 13

_______________________________ 14 RODERICK T. KENNEDY, Judge 15

WE CONCUR: 16

___________________________________ 17 JAMES J. WECHSLER, Judge 183 _________________________________ 1 LINDA M. VANZI, Judge 2
Exhibit 32.2





CERTIFICATION





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Aceto Corporation, a New York corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Douglas Roth, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to Section 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:




(1)
The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and 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.




/s/ Douglas Roth


Chief Financial Officer


(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)


November 6, 2009
#### § 62.54 Ownership identification.

Ownership identification on private or state aids to navigation is permitted so long as it does not change or hinder an understanding of the meaning of the aid to navigation.

[CGD 97-018, 63 FR 33573, June 19, 1998]
December 10, 2010 

Memorandum Memorializing Ex Parte Communication

TO: expartecommunications@hq.doe.gov (sent via email) 

On December 10, 2010, staff of the Air-Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) met 

with staff of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to discuss the amount of time AHRI, as a third 

party reporting agency for manufacturers of commercial products, will need for compliance with the 

reporting requirements for commercial HVAC equipment and water heaters to be set forth in the 

pending final rule in Docket No. EERE-2010-BT-CE-0014/RIN 1904-AC23. 

Meeting attendees were the following: 

 Representing DOE: 

 Scott Blake Harris 

 Stephanie Weiner 

 Laura Barhydt 

 Ashley Armstrong 

 Representing AHRI: 

 David Calabrese 

 Joseph Mattingly 

 Karim Amrane 

 Bill Tritsis 

Respectfully submitted, 

Joseph M. Mattingly 

AHRI General Counsel
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO. 2-07-360-CV

DOROTHY A. MOREHEAD,                                                       APPELLANTS

VAUGHN R. MOREHEAD, 

AND JAMES P. MOREHEAD, 

III, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS

HEIRS AT LAW OF GLORIA

MOREHEAD, DECEASED	

	V.

HISHAM BISMAR, M.D.	APPELLEE

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

	FROM THE 348TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

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

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

	Appellants Dorothy A. Morehead, Vaughn R. Morehead, and James P. Morehead, III, individually and as heirs at law of Gloria Morehead, deceased, filed this accelerated appeal of the trial court’s order granting Appellee Hisham Bismar’s motion to dismiss their medical malpractice suit.  We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

	On January 14, 2008, we notified appellants by letter of our concern that we lacked jurisdiction over the appeal because the order being appealed does not appear to be an appealable interlocutory order, and we indicated that their appeal could be dismissed unless they filed a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal by January 24, 2008.2  We have not received a response.

	 The order granting appellee’s motion to dismiss expressly provides that it is made pursuant to section 74.351(b) of the civil practice and remedies code.3  While an interlocutory order granting a motion to dismiss under section 74.351(l) is appealable,4 an interlocutory order granting a motion to dismiss under section 74.351(b) is not.5

	 Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.6

								PER CURIAM

PANEL D:  CAYCE, C.J.; LIVINGSTON and DAUPHINOT, JJ.

DELIVERED:  February 21, 2008
§ 154.108 Exemptions. ( a ) The Assistant Commandant for Marine Safety, Security and Environmental Protection, acting for the Commandant, grants an exemption or partial exemption from compliance with any requirement in this part if: ( 1 ) A facility operator submits an application for the exemption via the COTP; and
( 2 ) It is determined, from the application, that: ( i ) Compliance with the requirement is economically or physically impractical;
( ii ) No alternative procedures, methods, or equipment standards exist that would provide an equivalent level of safety and protection from pollution by oil or hazardous material; and
( iii ) The likelihood of oil or hazardous material being discharged is not substantially increased as a result of the exemption.
( b ) If requested, the applicant must submit any appropriate information, including an environmental and economic assessment of the effects of and reasons for the exemption, and proposed procedures, methods or equipment standards.
( c ) The exemption may specify the procedures, methods, or equipment standards that will apply.
( d ) An exemption is granted or denied in writing. The decision of the Assistant Commandant for Marine Safety, Security and Environmental Protection is a final agency action.
[CGD 75-124, 45 FR 7169, Jan. 31, 1980, as amended by CGD 88-052, 53 FR 25122, July 1, 1988; CGD 86-034, 55 FR 36252, Sept. 4, 1990; 55 FR 49997, Dec. 4, 1990; CGD 96-026, 61 FR 33666, June 28, 1996; CGD 93-056, 61 FR 41458, Aug. 8, 1996; CGD 97-023, 62 FR 33364, June 19, 1997; USCG-2002-12471, 67 FR 41333, June 18, 2002]
§ 183.37 Maximum weight capacity: Boats rated for manual propulsion and boats rated for outboard motors of 2 horsepower or less. ( a ) The maximum weight capacity marked on a boat that is rated for manual propulsion or for motors of 2 horsepower or less must not exceed 3 ⁄ 10 of the difference between the boat's maximum displacement and the boat's weight in pounds.
( b ) For the purposes of paragraph (a) of this section: ( 1 ) “Maximum displacement” is the weight of the volume of water displaced by the boat at its maximum level immersion in calm water without water coming aboard. For the purpose of this paragraph, a boat is level when it is transversely level and when either of the two following conditions are met: ( i ) The forward point where the sheer intersects the vertical centerline plane and the aft point where the sheer intersects the upper boundary of the transom (stern) are equidistant above the water surface or are equidistant below the water surface.
( ii ) The most forward point of the boat is level with or above the lowest point of water ingress.
( 2 ) “Boat weight” is the combination of: ( i ) Hull weight;
( ii ) Deck and superstructure weight; and
( iii ) Weight of permanent appurtenances.
[CGD 72-61R, 37 FR 15782, Aug. 4, 1972] Editorial Note
Editorial Note: For Federal Register citations affecting § 183.37, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at *www.govinfo.gov .*
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6271
GARY LEWIS MILLER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus J. C. WILSON; BEATRICE TOMADAKES; SERGEANT MOSELY; JOHN SALDI; ANDREW A. JACKSON, Defendants - Appellees.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-98-844-5-H) Submitted: July 8, 1999 Decided: July 14, 1999 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Gary Lewis Miller, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Gary Lewis Miller appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1999) complaint under28 U.S.C.A. § 1915(e) (West Supp. 1999). 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 Miller v. Wilson , No. CA-98-844-5-H (E.D.N.C. Feb. 1, 1999). 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
Notes: Conferenc e Call with Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE)

Concerning Modeling for SO2 Designations for the Wagner Area in Maryland

March 3, 2016

Participants:

MDE: Tad Aburn, Duane King, Jeetendra Upadhyay, Michael Woodman, Roger Thunell, and John Artes (via phone)

Raven Power: Tom Weissinger (via phone)

Talen Energy: Megan Toomey (via phone)

AECOM : Bob Paine and Mary Kaplan (via phone)

EPA Region 3: Cristina Ferna ndez, Dave Arnold, Nikos Singelis, Alice Chow, Donna Mastro, Irene Shandruk, Jessica Fry and Tim Leon

- Guerrero

EPA OAQPS: Chet Wayland, George Bridgers and James Thurman (via phone)

As per MDE’s request, the above participants participated in a conferenc e call to discuss a modeling protocol for the area surrounding Wagner Generating Station. EPA proposed a nonattainment area encompassing portions of Anne Arundel and Baltimore Counties around the Wagner Station in Maryland . MDE would like to submit addit ional modeling in response to this nonattainment area proposal and requested a discussion on what the modeling protocol should

look like.

MDE noted that Wagner unit 2 switched to a low sulfur coal in 2015 and wants to be able to use

those actual emissio ns retroactively in the modeling analysis. T hey noted that there is a permanent MATS limit on the facility. EPA stated that unless there is a federally enforceable limit in a permit, the MATS limit is not sufficient, and that three years of actual emissi ons must be used in the modeling analysis. Three years of actuals are supposed to be representative and act as a surrogate for three years of monitoring data.

Further discussion centered around use of beta options and low wind options. EPA had sent

sp ecific written comments to MDE modelers on the draft modeling protocol that MDE had shared with the EPA modeler the previous week.
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.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

The companies listed in this notice have given notice under section 4 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843) (BHC Act) and Regulation Y, (12 CFR part 225) to engage de novo, or to acquire or control voting securities or assets of a company, including the companies listed below, that engages either directly or through a subsidiary or other company, in a nonbanking activity that is listed in § 225.28 of Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.28) or that the Board has determined by Order to be closely related to banking and permissible for bank holding companies. Unless otherwise noted, these activities will be conducted throughout the United States. 

Each notice is available for inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notice also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the question whether the proposal complies with the standards of section 4 of the BHC Act. Additional information on all bank holding companies may be obtained from the National Information Center website at www.ffiec.gov/​nic/​. 

Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding the applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than June 27, 2000. 

                    A.                     **Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco**                     (Maria Villanueva, Consumer Regulation Group) 101 Market Street, San Francisco, California 94105-1579:                 

                    1.                     *Pierce County Bancorp,*                     Tacoma, Washington; to acquire Olympic Equities Corporation, Puyallup, Washington, and thereby engage in making residential and construction loans and other related activities related to the extension of credit, pursuant to §§ 225.28(b)(1) and (b)(2) of Regulation Y.                 

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, June 7, 2000. 

Robert deV. Frierson, 

Associate Secretary of the Board. 

[FR Doc. 00-14847 Filed 6-12-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
Exhibit 32.2    CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)   In connection with the Annual Report of Health Enhancement Products, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the Company), on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Janet L. Crance, Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to the best of my knowledge and belief:  (1) The Report 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  (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.     Date: May 18, 2009 /s/ Janet L. Crance Janet L. Crance Chief Accounting Officer   A SIGNED ORIGINAL OF THIS WRITTEN STATEMENT REQUIRED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO HEALTH ENHANCEMENT PRODUCTS, INC. AND WILL BE RETAINED BY HEALTH ENHANCEMENT PRODUCTS, INC. AND FURNISHED TO THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OR ITS STAFF UPON REQUEST.
§ 97.100 Applicability—Electronic documentation. ( a ) This subpart applies to— ( 1 ) A self-propelled cargo vessel of 500 gross tons or more, on an international voyage, that must comply with Chapter VI/5.6 or Chapter VII/5 of the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974 as amended (SOLAS), that does not solely carry liquid or solid cargoes in bulk, and that is either a U.S.-flagged self-propelled cargo vessel, or a foreign-flagged self-propelled cargo vessel that is operating in waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States;
( 2 ) A U.S.-flagged self-propelled cargo vessel that chooses to have this subpart applied to it by submitting a cargo securing manual for approval in accordance with § 97.200(a)(3);
( 3 ) A foreign-flagged self-propelled cargo vessel of 500 gross tons or more on an international voyage from a country that is not a signatory to SOLAS, that would otherwise be required to comply with Chapter VI/5.6 or Chapter VII/5 of SOLAS, that does not solely carry liquid or solid cargoes in bulk, and that is operating in waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States; and
( 4 ) Any organization applying to be selected as a cargo securing manual approval authority.
( b ) This subpart does not apply to a vessel owned by the Maritime Administration that is part of the Ready Reserve Force or the title of which is vested in the United States and which is used for public purposes only.
( c ) Any manual, letter, request, appeal, or ruling required by this subpart may be provided or submitted in electronic form or in printed form.
SEER Cancer Statistics Review 1975-2008National Cancer InstituteSEER Cancer Statistics Review 1975-2008National Cancer InstituteSEER Cancer Statistics Review 1975-2008National Cancer InstituteSEER Cancer Statistics Review 1975-2008National Cancer InstituteSEER Cancer Statistics Review 1975-2008National Cancer Institute
EXHIBIT 32.2

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 Alaska Airlines, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Bradley D. Tilden, Chief
Financial Officer 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:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                        |  |                      
|----------------------- |  | ---------------------
|                        | 
|By                      |  | /S/ Bradley D. Tilden
|Bradley D. Tilden      
|Chief Financial Officer
|May 10, 2006
```

[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 112 (Friday, June 9, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 36681]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-14570]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP00-310-000]

Discovery Gas Transmission LLC; Notice of Lost and Unaccounted 
for Gas Filing

June 5, 2000.
    Take notice that on May 31, 2000, Discovery Gas Transmission LLC 
(Discovery) filed to comply with the terms of its FERC Gas Tariff, 
First Revised Sheet Nos. 34, 44, and 53 relating to lost and 
unaccounted for gas for the calendar year 1999.
    Discovery states that it has reviewed the amount of lost and 
unaccounted for gas experienced by the Discovery system during the 1999 
calendar year, and based on that review it proposes to retain the 
current retention rate of 0.5 percent for the period commencing July 1, 
2000.
    Discovery states that copies of this filing are being mailed to its 
customers, state commissions and other interested parties.
    Any person desiring to protest said filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with section 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed on 
or before June 12, 2000. Protests will be considered by the Commission 
in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve 
to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Copies of this filing 
are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection 
in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at 
http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for 
assistance).

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-14570 Filed 6-8-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
```
FIL ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T J UNE 17, 2011 J OHN LEY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 0- 13 87 6 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 1 :0 5- cr-0 00 13 -CB- C-1 UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, ve rs us EDGAR SEGURA OCORO, a.k .a. Edd ie , a.k .a. El Cal vo , a.k .a. Cis co , Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt fo r th e So ut he rnDis tri ctof Al ab am a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ (Jun e 1 7, 2 01 1) Befo re EDMONDSON, PRYOR an d KRAVITC H, Circ ui t J ud ge s. PER CURI AM:Barry Park er, ap po in te d c ou ns el forEdg ar Se gu ra Oco ro inth is di rect cri m in al ap pe al , has m ov edto withdraw fro m furth er re pr es en ta ti onof t he ap pe ll an t an d fi le d abri ef p ur su an t t o And er s v. C al if orni a , 38 6 U.S. 7 38 , 87 S.Ct
. 13 96 , 18 L.Ed.2d49 3 (1 96 7) . Our i nd ep en de ntrev ie w of the en ti re re co rdrev eal s th atco un se l’s as se ss m en t o f th e rel at iv e m eri t o f th e ap pe al is co rrec t. Bec au se in de pe nd en t ex am in at io n o f th e en ti re rec or d re ve al s n o arg uabl e is su es of m eri t,
co un se l’s m ot io n t o wi th dr aw is GRANTED , andOcor o’s co nv ic ti on s an d
se nt en ces are AFFIRMED
.

2
§ 168.20 Applicable vessels. The requirements of this part apply to the following laden tankers of 5,000 gross tons or more: ( a ) All single hull tankers on the waters listed in § 168.40(a) and (b); and
( b ) All double hull tankers on the waters listed in § 168.40(a).
[USCG-2012-0975, 78 FR 50340, Aug. 19, 2013]