alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. RP00-354-000]

Take notice that on June 23, 2000, Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation (Columbia) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1, the revised tariff sheets listed on Appendix A to the filing, with a proposed effective date of August 1, 2000.

Columbia states that the purpose of this filing is to update its tariff consistent with Commission policy and decisions on tariff filings made by other interstate pipelines concerning permissible discounting arrangements and negotiated-rate authority related charges. Columbia's proposed tariff changes address an additional permissible discounted rate arrangement, negotiated rates and capacity release billing provisions, conversion of discount arrangements to negotiated rate arrangements, and the negotiation of surcharges and retainage.

Columbia states that copies of its filing have been mailed to all firm customers, interruptible customers and affected state commissions.

Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 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. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. 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. 00-17002  Filed 7-5-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 1845** 

In R e: RALPH D. DAVIS , Petitioner
.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus
. (1:07

- cr - 00254

- TSE

- 1)

Submitted : November 4, 2010 Decided: November 22 , 2010

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and KING , Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion
. Ralph D. Davis, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Ralph D. Davis petitions for a writ o f mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed actin g on his motion to unseal a search warrant. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. On November 1, 2010, the district court issued an order unsealing the affid avit in support of the search warrant, the application for the search
warrant , and the search warrant itself. Accordingly, because the district court has recently resolved the motion in question, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. We grant leave to
p roceed in forma pauperis. 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.
PETITION DENIED
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"Rules of Practice Amendments 2018 - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"um8tf9iUgM\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/home\/rules-procedures-forms\/rules-of-practice-amendments\/rules-of-practice-amendments-2018\/\">Rules of Practice Amendments 2018<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/home\/rules-procedures-forms\/rules-of-practice-amendments\/rules-of-practice-amendments-2018\/embed\/#?secret=um8tf9iUgM\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Rules of Practice Amendments 2018” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"um8tf9iUgM\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"Amendment Notices The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has adopted amendments to Federal Circuit Rules of Practice 25, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 44.  The final notice, order of adoption, and adopted amendments are available on the court’s website. These new rules apply to all cases and documents filed on [...]"}
EXHIBIT
      23





CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We
      have
      issued our report dated May 14, 2008 with respect to the consolidated financial
      statements and schedule included in the Annual Report of iDNA, Inc. and
      Subsidiaries on Form 10-K for the year ended January 31, 2008. We hereby consent
      to the incorporation by reference of said reports in the Registration Statements
      of iDNA, Inc. on Forms S-8 (File No. 2-93984, effective October 1, 1987, File
      No. 33-51727, effective December 28, 1993, and File No. 33-58579, effective
      May
      31, 1995).





/s/Grant
      Thornton, LLP


Cleveland,
      Ohio


May
      14,
      2008
Order entered April 15 , 2022

In The



### Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 22

- 00325

- CV

IN RE MICHAEL A. RUFF

, Relator

O riginal Proceeding from the Probate Court No. 2

D allas Cou nty, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. PR

- 11

- 02825

- 2

O RDER

Before Justices Myers, Nowell, and Goldstein

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DENY relator ’ s petition for

writ of mandamus, and we DENY the emergency motion for stay as moot.

/s/ LANA MY ERS

JUSTICE
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"Court Operating Status for the Week of January 18, 2021 - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"PMhti4NN9M\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/court-operating-status-for-the-week-of-january-18-2021\/\">Court Operating Status for the Week of January 18, 2021<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/court-operating-status-for-the-week-of-january-18-2021\/embed\/#?secret=PMhti4NN9M\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Court Operating Status for the Week of January 18, 2021” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"PMhti4NN9M\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit will be closed on Monday, January 18, 2021, in observance of Martin Luther King Jr.\u2019s Birthday, pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 26(a)(6), and on Wednesday, January 20, 2021, in observance of Inauguration Day, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 6103(c).\u00a0 For purposes of computation of […]"}
EXHIBIT 32.1

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


     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Pacific Health Care
Organization, Inc., on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), the undersigned, Tom Kubota, Chief Executive Officer of Pacific
Health Care Organization, Inc., certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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; 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: August 13, 2004              /S/ Tom Kubota
                                   ------------------------------------
                                   Tom Kubota, Chief Executive Officer
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
 

REGION VII
 

901 NORTH 5TH STREET 

KANSAS CITY, KANSAS 66101 

September 23, 2011 

Wendy A Garzon 

5646 South 22 Street 

Omaha, Nebraska 68107 

RE: SAID: 1478 

5646 South 22 Street 

Lead-Based Paint (LBP) Assessment 

Dear Owner/Resident: 

A Lead Based Paint assessment was recently performed on your property by the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency as part of the Omaha Lead site investigation. The purpose of 

this assessment is to determine whether a significant quantity of LBP is present on the exterior 

surface of structures, where deteriorating paint conditions (peeling, flaking, cracking, etc) exist 

that might increase lead concentrations in the yard above acceptable levels. 

Enclosed are the LBP assessment sheets for 5646 South 22 Street. The EPA has developed paint 

stabilization eligibility criteria that involve measuring the amount of deteriorated LBP on a 

structure and calculating the concentration of lead in soils around the home that would result if 

all of the identified deteriorated paint were to fall to the ground and uniformly mix with the soil 

under certain assumptions. During the LBP assessment, the areal extent of the deteriorated paint 

observed on structure surfaces was estimated and the lead content in the deteriorated paint was 

measured using an X-Ray Fluorescence instrument. 

The data obtained during the LBP assessment was used to estimate the increase in soil lead 

concentration that would result if all of the deteriorating paint identified in the assessment were 

to fall to the ground and mix with surface soil within six feet of the foundation of the structure. 

For purposes of this calculation, the deteriorating LBP on a structure is assumed to fall onto the 

ground surface within six feet of the foundation and be uniformly mixed with the top one inch 

of soil. The estimated lead concentration in the soil potentially caused by the deteriorating LBP 

provides a measure of the severity of LBP deterioration on individual structures. The EPA uses 

these criteria to rank properties based on the potential for recontamination of soil to occur. Paint 

stabilization is being offered at only those households with the most severe LBP problems, 

particularly where children under the age of seven reside. 

The LBP assessment performed by the EPA using the above criteria indicated that your 

house IS NOT eligible for paint stabilization. 
 

 

 

If you have any questions or concerns, please contact the EPA Public Information Center at 

(402) 731-3045. 

Sincerely, 

Pauletta R. France-Isetts 

Project Coordinator 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Enclosures 

Para información en español, llame al EPA Information Center (402) 731-3045. 

Omaha Lead Site LBP Assessment lllllll Il11 lllll llll Il1 Il1 14; 

LEGEND: H - N - P - 01 - 12345 Samples Analyzed 

---BVID Number 


-Sample Number 


----Mater~alP = Pant 


~deof Structure N = North S = South E = East W = West 


Sample Number Concentration StructureiFeature Substrate Color Detenoratet 

(Window, slding. porch, etc) (wood concrete etc ) Area
No. 11-5264.

#### Hahn *v.*Bauer et al.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certio-rari denied.
# • RCRA REVISION CHECKLIST 172 Land Disposal Restrictions Phase IV -- Extension ofCompliance Date for Characteristic Slags 63 FR 48124-48127 September9, 1998 (RCRA ClusterIX, HSWA) 

### SPA 20



# •

• t STATEANALOG IS: ANALOGOUSSTATE FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS FEDERALRCRACITATION CITATION EQUIV- LESS MORE BROADER WAC 173-303- SlRIN- SlRIN- ALENT GENT GENT IN SCOPE PART 268 - LAND DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS SUBPART D - TREATMENT STANDARDS WASTE SPEClFIC PROHlBITIONS-SECOND THIRD WASTES redesignate old 268.34(b)-(e) as 268.34(c)-(f); add new 268.34(b) setting November 26, 1998 as the effective date when 140(2)(a) slags from 268.34(b)-(f) Incorporated by X secondary lead reference. smelting which exhibit the Toxicity Characteristic due to one or more metals, areprohibited from land disposal

September 9, 1998 - Page 1 of 1 CLI72 - Revised: 'lJ22199 Printed: 12119101
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000006814
<NAME>                        COMFORCE Corporation
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                       Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                               JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                 JUN-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                        1
<CASH>                                             7,163
<SECURITIES>                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     94,250
<ALLOWANCES>                                         766
<INVENTORY>                                            0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 106,537
<PP&E>                                            13,896
<DEPRECIATION>                                     3,096
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   262,880
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             33,727
<BONDS>                                          134,894
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                            0
<COMMON>                                             164
<OTHER-SE>                                        43,503
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     262,880
<SALES>                                          218,194
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 218,194
<CGS>                                            176,925
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    208,692
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     (12)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                10,757
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (1,243)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         291
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (1,534)
<DISCONTINUED>                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                        0
<CHANGES>                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (1,534)
<EPS-BASIC>                                        (0.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      (0.09)


</TABLE>
Exhibit



Exhibit 10.f





OTHER COMPENSATORY ARRANGEMENTS FOR EXECUTIVE OFFICERS




In order to assure that the Company’s senior executives are fully aware of the tax, legal and financial implications of the Company’s benefit programs, the Company has established a program to provide senior executives with assistance in their estate, financial and tax planning matters.  Under this program, the Company will pay up to $10,000 for such professional services each year, with a special “carry-forward” of the second year’s $10,000 allowance during the first year to cover additional costs associated with development of an initial estate and financial plan.  The Company will inform each participant during the course of this process as to the amount of professional fees allocated to services performed on such participant’s behalf under the program.  The value of any such services received will be taxable as ordinary income to the participant.


The Company’s executive officers are permitted to utilize certain Company equipment for personal purposes, if available, and subject to IRS and Company rules for reporting or reimbursement.






245443/105405
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

APPLE INC.,

Appellant

v.

RFCYBER CORP.,

Appellee

______________________

2023-2396

______________________

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2022-

00412.

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

In Re RFCYBER CORP.,

Appellant

______________________

2023-2418

______________________

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2022-

00413.

______________________

ON MOTION

Case: 23-2396 Document: 23 Page: 1 Filed: 02/21/2024
2 APPLE INC. v. RFCYBER CORP.

______________________

Before TARANTO, Circuit Judge.

O R D E R

Apple Inc. moves to dismiss its Appeal No. 2023-2396 

pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 42(b) and 

to withdraw as appellee from RFCyber Corp.’s Appeal No. 

2023-2418. The motion states that RFCyber Corp. does not 

oppose either request. The parties agree to bear their own 

costs with respect to Appeal No. 2023-2396.

Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The motion is granted to the extent that the abovecaptioned appeals are deconsolidated and Appeal No. 2023-

2396 is dismissed. Each side shall bear its own costs regarding Appeal No. 2023-2396.

(2) Apple Inc. is withdrawn from Appeal No. 2023-

2418. The official caption for Appeal No. 2023-2418 is revised in this order to reflect Apple’s non-participation.

(3) The opening brief in Appeal No. 2023-2418 is due 

no later than 60 days from the date of entry of this order. 

(4) The United States Patent and Trademark Office 

(PTO) is directed to inform this court, within 30 days from 

the date of entry of this order, whether it intends to intervene in Appeal No. 2023-2418.

(5) If the PTO elects to participate as intervenor in Appeal No. 2023-2418, its docketing statement is due no later 

than 14 days after it files its notice of election to intervene, 

and its brief is due within 40 days after the opening brief 

is served.

(6) If the PTO elects not to intervene in Appeal No. 

2023-2418, the appendix is due no later than seven days 

from either the date of filing of the opening brief or the date 

Case: 23-2396 Document: 23 Page: 2 Filed: 02/21/2024
APPLE INC. v. RFCYBER CORP. 3

of filing of the PTO’s notice of non-election, whichever is 

later.

(7) The Clerk of Court shall transmit a copy of this order to the merits panel assigned to Appeal No. 2023-2418.

February 21, 2024

 Date

FOR THE COURT

ISSUED AS A MANDATE (as to Appeal No. 2023-2396 

only): February 21, 2024

cc: United States Patent and Trademark Office

Case: 23-2396 Document: 23 Page: 3 Filed: 02/21/2024
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

No. 19

- 1391

AARON EDMONDS TYSON

, Appellant

v

.

SUPERINTENDENT HOUTZDALE SCI ;

ATTORNEY GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA

( M.D. Pa. Civ. No. 3:13

- cv

- 02609 )

ORDER

Present: JORDAN, RESTREPO

, and GREENBERG

, Circuit Judges

To correct a typographical error in footnote 8 of the precedential opinion filed on

September 23, 2020, that opinion is VACATED and an amended opinion is filed

contemporaneously with this order. This order does not alter the judgment filed on

September 23 , 2020. That judgment remains in full force and effect.

By the Court,

s/ L. Felipe Restrepo

Circuit Judge

Dated: September 24, 2020

L mr/ cc: Michael Wiseman

Mark S. Matthews