alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     Textainer Equipment Income Fund III, 10K
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000866888
<NAME>                        Textainer Equipment Income Fund III, L.P.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     US Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000>
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         2,875
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  4,165
<ALLOWANCES>                                   465
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               15
<PP&E>                                         94,752
<DEPRECIATION>                                 42,262
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 59,080
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          2,196
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     56,884
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   59,080
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               15,135
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  12,669
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (244)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                2,710
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   2,710
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0



</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5031 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5031

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 13, 1994

  Mr. Sawyer introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

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

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF DEADLINE.

    Notwithstanding the time limitations of section 13 of the Federal 
Power Act (16 U.S.C. 806) the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 
upon the request of the licensee for FERC Project No. 9423 (and after 
reasonable notice), is authorized, in accordance with the good faith, 
due diligence, and public interest requirements of such section 13 and 
the Commission's procedures under such section, to extend the time 
required for commencement of construction for the project for up to a 
maximum of 3 consecutive 2-year periods. This section shall take effect 
for the project upon the expiration of the extension (issued by the 
Commission under such section 13) of the period required for 
commencement of construction of such project.
                                 <all>
```
#### NOLLNER et al. v. SHAWVER.

No. 13232.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Jan. 18, 1951.

Rehearing denied Mar. 20, 1951.

Holmes, Circuit Judge, dissented.

Philip S. Kouri, Z. D. Allen, Wichita Falls, Tex., for appellants.

Hobert Price, Dallas, Tex., for appellee.

Before HUTCHESON, Chief Judge, and HOLMES and RUSSELL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

As a part of their motion for rehearing, the appellants present a supplemental transcript of the record from which it appears that the contention was made prior to the Court’s charge to the jury that the -issue of unavoidable accident was not in the case and should not be charged. The statement in the opinion that “Counsel for the plaintiff attempted to except to the charge” [186 F.2d 237, 238] may be subject to the construction, as now complained of, that there was no proper effort made to present the exception, but what we meant was that the statement of the exception was interrupted by the Court’s ruling that “you did not question the propriety -of the giving of the charge, you had an opportunity to do so.” In view of the supplemental transcript, it appears that there is no basis for any determination that counsel for the appellants first acquiesced in the propriety of the proposed charge, and then attempted to except to it, and the portion of the opinion with reference to this feature of the case is therefore withdrawn.

The 'question remaining then is whether the giving of the charge over the objections constituted reversible error. As to this, the majority is of the opinion that the appel-' *898lant’s contention of reversible error is not established in this case.

The motion for a rehearing is denied, and the judgment of affirmance heretofore entered adhered to.

HOLMES, Circuit Judge, dissents.
Editorial Note on Part 74
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 74 appear at 64 FR 4055, Jan. 27, 1999.

§ 74.436 Special requirements for automatic relay stations. ( a ) An automatic relay station must be designed, installed, and protected so that the transmitter can only be activated or controlled by persons authorized by the licensee.
( b ) An automatic relay station may accomplish retransmission of the incoming signals by either heterodyne frequency conversion or by modulating the transmitter with the demodulated incoming signals.
( c ) An automatic relay station transmitter may relay the demodulated incoming signals from one or more receivers.
[51 FR 4602, Feb. 6, 1986, as amended at 60 FR 55483, Nov. 1, 1995]
#### § 90.812 [Reserved]
213P15

#### In the Matter of the Foreclosure of Deed of Trust Executed by Daryl O. Sutton and Shonda J. Sutton in the Original Amount of $136,000.00 Dated April 14, 2005, Recorded in Book 6297, Page 1933, Guilford County Registry, Substitute Trustee Services, Inc., Substitute Trustee

Respondents’ PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 (COA14-761)

Denied
October 11, 2011

No. 10-10652.

#### Johnson *v.*Obama, President of the United States, et al.; and Johnson *v.*Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security

(Reported below: 414 Fed. Appx. 887). C. A. 8th Cir. Because the Court lacks a quorum, 28 U. S. C. § 1, and since the only qualified Justice is of the opinion that the case cannot be heard and determined at the next Term of the Court, the judgment is affirmed under 28 U. S. C. § 2109, which provides that under these circumstances “the court shall enter its order affirming the judgment of the court from which the case was brought for review with the same effect as upon affirmance by an equally divided court.”

The Chief Justice, Justice Scalia, Justice Kennedy, Justice Thomas, Justice Ginsburg, Justice *938Breyer, Justice Alito, and Justice Sotomayor took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
#### § 9.1 Purpose.

The purpose of this part is to set forth the 911 and E911 service requirements and conditions applicable to telecommunications carriers (subpart B); commercial mobile radio service (CMRS) providers (subpart C); interconnected Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) providers (subpart D); providers of telecommunications relay services (TRS) for persons with disabilities (subpart E); multi-line telephone systems (MLTS) (subpart F); and Mobile-Satellite Service (MSS) providers (subpart G). The rules in this part also include requirements to help ensure the resiliency, redundancy, and reliability of communications systems, particularly 911 and E911 networks and/or systems (subpart H).
Fw: permit to increase air pollution by Sierra Pacific

R9AirPermits to: shalev.omer 10/18/2012 03:56 PM

Sent by: Omer Shalev

----- Forwarded by Omer Shalev/R9/USEPA/US on 10/18/2012 03:56 PM -----

From: Jo norene <jonorene@yahoo.com>

To: R9AirPermits@EPA

Date: 10/16/2012 03:50 PM

Subject: permit to increase air pollution by Sierra Pacific

Dear Omer Shalev,

I wish to express my opposition to the permit before you to build a 31 megawatt wood burning power 

plant north of Anderson.

As you know this will be be in addition to the 6 wood burning power plants in Shasta County.

The plant will emit about 330,000 tons of greenhouse gases annually.

All 6 plants would then be generating about 2.16million tons of greenhouse gases annually.

The State says Shasta County already receives 26.5 TON of carbon monoxide released into the air 

DAILY.

It is unreasonable to allow this plant to increase our air pollution 

The EPA sould denythe permit.

Sincerely,

Joan Coleman

Redding Ca
§ 80.767 Propagation curve. The propagation graph, § 80.767 Graph 1, must be used in computing the service area contour. The graph provides data for field strengths in dBu for an effective radiated power of 1 kW, over sea water, fresh water or land (smooth earth); transmitting antena heights of 4,800, 3,200, 1,600, 800, 400, 200, and 100 feet; based on a receiving antenna height of 9 meters (30 feet), for the 156-162 MHz band. The use of this is described in this section. ( a ) Calculate the effective radiated power of the coast station, Ps in dB referred to 1 kW (dBk), as follows: where, Pt = Transmitter output power in dB referred to 1 kW: Transmitter output power in watts is converted to dBk by Pt = 10 [log10 (Power in watts)]−30. Also see § 80.761 Graph 1 for a conversion graph. G = Antenna gain in dB referred to a standard half-wave dipole, in the direction of each plotted radial, and L = Line losses between the transmitter and the antenna, in dB.
Notes:
1. To determine field strengths where the distance is known, for effective radiated powers other than 1kW (0 dBk): Enter the graph from the “statute miles” scale at the known distance, read up to intersection with the curve for the antenna height, read left to the “dBu for 1 kW radiated” scale and note the referenced field strength (Fe). The value of the actual field strength (F) in dBu will be F = Fe + Ps where Ps is the effective radiated power calculated above. 2. To determine distance, where the actual field strength is specified, for effective radiated powers other than 0 dBk: The value of the field referenced strength will be Fe = F−Ps in dBu. Enter the graph, from the “dBu for 1 kW radiated” scale at the corrected value of Fe, read right to intersection with the antenna height, read down to “statute miles” scale.
( b ) Determine the antenna height. For antenna heights between the heights for which this graph is drawn, use linear interpolation; assume linear height-gain for antennas higher than 4,800 feet.
( c ) For receiver antenna heights lower than 9 meters (30 feet), assume that the field strength is the same as at 9 meters (30 feet).
( d ) Assume that propagation over fresh water or over land is the same as that over sea water.
EX-31              RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATION OF GARY BORGLUND

                     RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATION

I, Gary Borglund, certify that:

1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Avery
Sports Turf, Inc.;

2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances
under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to
the period covered by this report;

3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
financial information included in this report, fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and
cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods
presented in this report;

4.  I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure
controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e)) [omitted pursuant to extended compliance period] for
the small business issuer and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused
such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my
supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)  [omitted pursuant to extended compliance period]

(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's
disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report
my conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; and

(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business
issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred
during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter
(the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of
an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably
likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and

5.  I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal
control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's
auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer's board
of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal control over financial reporting
which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small
business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management
or other employees who have a significant role in the small
business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.


Dated: November 8, 2004                /s/ Gary Borglund
                                       Gary Borglund, President
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4852 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4852

To provide congressional approval of a governing international fishery 
                               agreement.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 28, 1994

     Mr. Manton (for himself, Mr. Young of Alaska, and Mr. Studds) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                     Merchant Marine and Fisheries

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide congressional approval of a governing international fishery 
                               agreement.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That notwithstanding 
section 203 of the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 
U.S.C. 1823), the governing international fishery agreement between the 
Government of the United States of America and the Government of the 
Republic of Lithuania, as contained in the message to Congress from the 
President of the United States dated July 18, 1994, is approved by the 
Congress as a governing international fishery agreement for the 
purposes of such Act and shall enter into force and effect with respect 
to the United States on the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
###### Editorial Note on Part 74

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 74 appear at 64 FR 4055, Jan. 27, 1999.

#### § 74.6 Licensing of broadcast auxiliary and low power auxiliary stations.

Applicants for and licensees of remote pickup broadcast stations, aural broadcast auxiliary stations, television broadcast auxiliary stations, and low power auxiliary stations authorized under subparts D, E, F, and H of this part are subject to the application and procedural rules for wireless telecommunications services contained in part 1, subpart F of this chapter. Applicants for these stations may file either manually or electronically as specified in § 1.913(b) and (d) of this chapter.

[68 FR 12761, Mar. 17, 2003]
EXHIBIT 99.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND  CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350  ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Report of United Industries Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ending March 31,
2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert L. Caulk, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



|Dated: May 15, 2003 |  | By: | /s/ROBERT L. CAULKRobert L. Caulk
President and
Chief Executive Officer
|------------------- |  | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------

In
connection with the Report, I, Daniel J. Johnston, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



|Dated: May 15, 2003 |  | By: | /s/DANIEL J. JOHNSTONDaniel J. Johnston
Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
|------------------- |  | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to United Industries Corporation and will be retained by United
Industries Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---

QuickLinks
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22

- 7220

ALFONZO HOWARD , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v. MICHAEL STEPHAN , Respondent

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Aiken

. Richard Mark Gerge l , District Judge. ( 1:21

- cv - 03356

- RMG )

Submitted : August 24, 2023 Decided: August 28, 2023

Before QUATTLEBAUM and HEYTENS , Circuit Judges , and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Alfonzo Howard , Appellant Pro Se

.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 22-7220 Doc: 9 Filed: 08/28/2023 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM:
Alfonzo Howard seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the magistrate judge ’s recommendation and dismissing as untimely Howard ’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition and the court’s order denying Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) relief

. * See Gonzalez v. Thaler , 565 U.S. 134, 148 & n.9 (2012) (explaining that § 225 4 petitions are subject to one

- year statute of limitations, running from latest of four commencement dates enumerated in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)). The order s are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U. S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). When, as here, the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez , 565
U.S. at 140

- 41 (citing Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)). We have indepen dently reviewed the record and conclude that Howard has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argume nt would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

* Although Howard asserts on appeal that he did not consent to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge, see 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), the district court properly referred Howard’s petition under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) for proposed findings and recommendations. USCA4 Appeal: 22-7220 Doc: 9 Filed: 08/28/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
**Official websites use.gov****.gov**

**Secure .gov websites use HTTPS 	A lock****https:**

Kevin Morison of the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) speaks with a participant

Lt. Eliott Cohen, Maryland State Police

COPS Office Deputy Director Rob Chapman speaks with Lt. Col. Jeff Bader, St. Louis County Police Department (MO)

DOJ's Ben Hernandez-Stern (Attorney Advisor, Office of Justice Programs)

Participants

Participants

Jonathan Wisbey of the New Orleans Police Department (LA)

Jonathan Thompson (Executive Director, National Sheriff's Association) and Laura Cooper (Director of Government Affairs, National Sheriff's Association)

Sean Smoot, Member of the President's Task Force on 21st Century Policing, discusses law enforcement hiring

Superintendent Frank Mancini, Boston Police Department (MA)

Chief Patrice Andrews, Morrisville Police Department (NC), and Sean Smoot, Police Benevolent & Protective Association of Illinois

Catherine Sanz (President, Women in Federal Law Enforcement)

Ronald S. Honberg (National Director - Policy and Legal Affairs, National Alliance on Mental Illness)

Ben Haiman and  Assistant Chief Robert Contee III (both of the DC Metropolitan Police Department)

COPS Office Director Ronald L. Davis

# SPOTLIGHT

SUBSCRIBE TO EMAIL UPDATES

SUBSCRIBE TO CP DISPATCH

#### ABOUT

                    - Contact COPS
                    - Community Policing in Action: Photo Contest
                    - The L. Anthony Sutin Award for Innovative Law Enforcement and Community Partnerships
                    - Photo Galleries
                    - Subscribe

#### NEWS

                    - Press Releases
                    - Executive Order on Safe Policing for Safer Communities 

#### GRANTS

                    - Compliance & Reporting
                    - Program Documents
                    - Grantees
                    - Grantee Success Stories
                    - Agency Portal Video Tutorials
                    - Award Announcement Map

#### RESOURCES

                    - National Blue Alert Network
                    - Recent Releases
                    - Resource Center/Publications
                    - E-Newsletter: Community Policing Dispatch
                    - Podcast Series: The Beat
                    - Video Series: What’s New in Blue
                    - Tribal Community Policing Resources
                    - Addressing Human Trafficking
                    - Community Policing Topics
                    - Recruitment, Hiring & Retention

#### TRAINING & TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

                      - Collaborative Reform Initiative for Technical Assistance Center
                      - COPS Training Portal
                      - Training

#### ACCOUNT ACCESS

#### ACCESSIBILITY INFORMATION

FOIALanguage Access PlanLegal Policies and DisclaimersNo Fear ActOpen GovernmentPlain WritingPrivacy PolicyUSA.govWhistleblower ProtectionSocial MediaDepartment of JusticeAccessibility